Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Article
  • Published:

Prognostic value of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System five-group cytogenetic abnormality classification for the outcome prediction of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatric myelodysplastic syndrome

Subjects

Abstract

Cytogenetic abnormalities are a major risk factor for relapse after hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). We aimed to evaluate the value of the five-group cytogenetic classification according to the revised International Prognostic Scoring System (R-IPSS) for predicting the outcome after HSCT in pediatric patients with MDS. We retrospectively analyzed the Japanese registration data of 242 pediatric patients with MDS. According to the R-IPSS classification, 112 (45.5%) patients had good, 55 (22.7%) had intermediate, 64 (26.4%) had poor, and 11 (4.6%) had very poor cytogenetics. The 5-year overall survival (5yOS) was 72%, 69%, 59%, and 30% in the good, intermediate, poor, and very poor cytogenetic subgroups (p = 0.026), respectively. The very good, good, and intermediate subgroups were grouped into a “standard” subgroup and reclassified into three subgroups (standard, poor, and very poor). Patients with very poor risk had worse 5yOS (hazard ratio 2.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02–4.61; p = 0.04) and a much higher 5yCIR (hazard ratio 2.52, 95% CI 1.05–6.04; p = 0.04) than those of patients in the standard group in the multivariate analysis, indicating that very poor risk cytogenetic characteristics independently predicted worse outcome after HSCT in pediatric patients with MDS.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Fig. 1: Transplantation outcomes of pediatric MDS patients according to R-IPSS.
Fig. 2: Transplantation outcomes of pediatric MDS patients according to a simplified three-group (standard, poor, and very poor) R-IPSS and an era of HSCT.
Fig. 3: A univariate analysis by a log-rank test.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tefferi A, Vardiman JW. Myelodysplastic syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2009;361:1872–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Hasle H, Wadsworth LD, Massing BG, McBride M, Schultz KR. A population-based study of childhood myelodysplastic syndrome in British Columbia, Canada. Br J Haematol. 1999;106:1027–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Deeg HJ, Storer B, Slattery JT, Anasetti C, Doney KC, Hansen JA, et al. Conditioning with targeted busulfan and cyclophosphamide for hemopoietic stem cell transplantation from related and unrelated donors in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome. Blood. 2002;100:1201–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Armand P, Kim HT, DeAngelo DJ, Ho VT, Cutler CS, Stone RM, et al. Impact of cytogenetics on outcome of de novo and therapy-related AML and MDS after allogeneic transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2007;13:655–64.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Greenberg PL, Cox C, LeBeau MM, Fenaux P, Morel P, Sanz G, et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 1997;89:2079–88.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Greenberg PL, Tuechler H, Schanz J, Sanz G, Garcia-Manero G, Solé F, et al. Revised international prognostic scoring system for myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2012;120:2454–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Deeg HJ, Scott BL, Fang M, Shulman HM, Gyurkocza B, Myerson D, et al. Five-group cytogenetic risk classification, monosomal karyotype, and outcome after hematopoietic cell transplantation for MDS or acute leukemia evolving from MDS. Blood. 2012;120:1398–408.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Koenecke C, Göhring G, de Wreede LC, van Biezen A, Scheid C, Volin L, et al. Impact of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System, cytogenetics and monosomal karyotype on outcome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation for myelodysplastic syndromes and secondary acute myeloid leukemia evolving from myelodysplastic syndromes: a retrospective multicenter study of the European Society of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. Haematologica. 2015;100:400–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Della Porta MG, Alessandrino EP, Bacigalupo A, van Lint MT, Malcovati L, Pascutto C, et al. Predictive factors for the outcome of allogeneic transplantation in patients with MDS stratified according to the revised IPSS-R. Blood. 2014;123:2333–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Hasle H, Niemeyer CM, Chessells JM, Baumann I, Bennett JM, Kerndrup G, et al. A pediatric approach to the WHO classification of myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative diseases. Leukemia. 2003;17:277–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Atsuta Y, Suzuki R, Yoshimi A, Gondo H, Tanaka J, Hiraoka A, et al. Unification of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation registries in Japan and establishment of the TRUMP system. Int J Hematol. 2007;86:269–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Bennet JM, Catovsky D, Daniel MT, Flandrin G, Galton DA, Gralnick HR, et al. Proposals for the classification of the myelodysplastic syndromes. Br J Haematol. 1982;51:189–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Vardiman JW, Thiele J, Arber DA, Brunning RD, Borowitz MJ, Porwit A, et al. The 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: rationale and important changes. Blood. 2009;114:937–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Giralt S, Ballen K, Rizzo D, Bacigalupo A, Horowitz M, Pasquini M, et al. Reduced-intensity conditioning regimen workshop: defining the dose spectrum. Report of a workshop convened by the center for international blood and marrow transplant research. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2009;15:367–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kanda Y. Investigation of the freely available easy-to-use software ‘EZR’ for medical statistics. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2013;48:452–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Andolina JR, Kletzel M, Tse WT, Jacobsohn DA, Duerst RE, Schneiderman J, et al. Allogeneic hematopoetic stem cell transplantation in pediatric myelodysplastic syndromes: improved outcomes for de novo disease. Pediatr Transplant. 2011;15:334–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Gohring G, Michalova K, Beverloo HB, Betts D, Harbott J, Haas OA, et al. Complex Karyotype newly defined: the strongest prognostic factor in advanced childhood myelodysplastic syndrome. Blood. 2010;116:3766–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kikuchi A, Hasegawa D, Ohtsuka Y, Hamamoto K, Kojima S, Okamura J, et al. Outcome of children with refractory anaemia with excess of blast (RAEB) and RAEB in transformation (RAEB-T) in the Japanese MDS99 study. Br J Haematol. 2012;158:657–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Moriwaki K, Manabe A, Taketani T, Kikuchi A, Nakahata T, Hayashi Y. Cytogenetics and clinical features of pediatric myelodysplastic syndrome in Japan. Int J Hematol. 2014;100:478–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Luna-Fineman S, Shannon KM, Atwater SK, Davis J, Masterson M, Orgega J, et al. Myelodysplastic and myeloproliferative disorders of childhood: a study of 167 patients. Blood. 1999;93:459–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Oran B, Kongtim P, Popat U, de Lima M, Jabbour E, Lu X, et al. Cytogenetics, donor type, and use of hypomethylating agents in myelodysplastic syndrome with allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2014;20:1618–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Strahm B, Nolke P, Zecca M, Korthof ET, Bierings M, Furlan I, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for advanced myelodysplastic syndrome in children: results of the EWOG-MDS 98 study. Leukemia. 2011;25:455–62.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Madureira ABM, Eapen M, Locatelli F, Teira P, Zhang MJ, Davies SM, et al. Analysis of risk factors influencing outcome in children with myelodysplastic syndrome after unrelated cord blood transplantation. Leukemia. 2011;25:449–54.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Wlodarski MW, Hirabayashi S, Pastor V, Starý J, Hasle H, Masetti R, et al. Prevalence, clinical characteristics, and prognosis of GATA2-related myelodysplastic syndromes in children and adolescents. Blood. 2016;127:1387–97.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Locatelli F, Strahm B. How I treat myelodysplastic syndromes of childhood. Blood. 2018;131:1406–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Basquiera AL, Pizzi S, Correas AG, Longo PG, Goldman WC, Prates MV, et al. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatric myelodysplastic syndromes: a multicenter experience from Argentina. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2015;62:153–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Smith AR, Christiansen EC, Wagner JE, Cao Q, MacMillan ML, Stefanski HE, et al. Early hematopoietic stem cell transplant is associated with favorable outcomes in children with MDS. Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2013;60:705–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. de Lima M, Giralt S, Thall PF, de Padua Silva L, Jones RB, Komanduri K, et al. Maintenance therapy with low-dose azacitidine after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for recurrent acute myelogenous leukemia or myelodysplastic syndrome: a dose and schedule finding study. Cancer. 2010;116:5420–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bejar R, Stevenson K, Abdel-Wahab O, Galili N, Nilsson B, Garcia-Manero G, et al. Clinical effect of point mutations in myelodysplastic syndromes. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2496–506.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Papaemmanuil E, Cazzola M, Boultwood J, Malcovati L, Vyas P, Bowen D, et al. Somatic SF3B1 mutation in myelodysplasia with ring sideroblasts. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1384–95.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Bejar R, Stevenson K, Caughey B, Lindsley RC, Mar BG, Stojanov P, et al. Somatic mutations predict poor outcome in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome after hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2691–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank all medical and co-medical staff who participated in the treatment of pediatric patients with MDS in Japan.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

SY, MK, KW, SI, DH, YA, and NY designed the study, SY performed the statistical analysis, SY, and NY wrote the paper, and MN, AH, MS, TK, FI, HY, YT, YK, YH, and AM were the principal investigators at the centers recruiting the highest number of patients for the study. All authors reviewed and approved the final version of the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Shohei Yamamoto.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yamamoto, S., Kato, M., Watanabe, K. et al. Prognostic value of the revised International Prognostic Scoring System five-group cytogenetic abnormality classification for the outcome prediction of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatric myelodysplastic syndrome. Bone Marrow Transplant 56, 3016–3023 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-021-01446-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41409-021-01446-z

Search

Quick links