RESUMO
Introduction: Variations in mutation rates among acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients with myeloid sarcoma (MS) underscore the need for a thorough examination. This meta-analysis was conducted to fill the information gap concerning mutation frequencies in AML patients presenting with MS. Materials and methods: This study included retrospective and prospective cohorts. It examined genetic alterations in AML patients with and without MS across all age groups. The search strategy employed terms such as "acute myeloid leukemia," "extramedullary," "granulocytic sarcoma," "myeloid sarcoma," and "leukemic cutis" in the EMBASE, MEDLINE, and Scopus databases. Excluded from the study were reviews, case reports, and case series with fewer than 10 cases. Statistical analyses were performed with Review Manager 5.4 software. Results: The primary analysis incorporated data from 37 cohorts involving 5646 diagnosed AML patients and revealed a 17.42% incidence of MS. The most prevalent mutation among AML patients with MS was FLT3-ITD, with a pooled prevalence of 17.50% (95% CI 12.60% to 22.50%; I2 82.48%). The dominant fusion gene was RUNX1::RUNX1T1, displaying a pooled prevalence of 28.10% (95% CI 15.10% to 41.20%; I2 96.39%). In comparison, no significant intergroup differences were observed for NPM1, FLT3-ITD, KIT, and IDH2 mutations. Interestingly, the CEBPA mutation exhibited protective effects for MS patients, with an odds ratio of 0.51 (95% CI 0.32 to 0.81; I2 0%). Conversely, the NRAS mutation was associated with an increased risk of MS development, with an odds ratio of 5.07 (95% CI 1.87 to 13.73; I2 0%). Conclusion: This meta-analysis sheds light on the prevalence of genetic mutations in AML patients with MS, providing insights into the unique characteristics of the mutations and their frequencies. These discoveries are crucial in informing therapeutic and prognostic decisions for individuals with myeloid sarcoma.
RESUMO
Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with mutated RUNX1 (RUNX1mut) is considered to have an unfavorable prognosis. However, recent studies have reported comparable survival outcomes with wild-type RUNX1 (RUNX1wt). To assess the clinical outcomes of AML with and without RUNX1mut, we performed a prospective cohort study and systematic review and meta-analysis. The study enrolled 135 patients (27 with RUNX1mut; 108 with RUNX1wt). There were no significant differences in the median OS and RFS of the RUNX1mut and RUNX1wt groups (9.1 vs. 12.2 months; p = 0.268 and 7.8 vs. 14.6 months; p = 0.481, respectively). A subgroup analysis of de novo AML patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics showed similar outcomes. Our meta-analysis pooled data from 23 studies and our study. The complete remission rate was significantly lower in the RUNX1mut group (pooled odds ratio: 0.42). The OS, RFS, and event-free survival rates also favored the RUNX1wt group (pooled risk ratios: 1.36, 1.37, and 1.37, respectively). A subgroup analysis of de novo AML patients with intermediate-risk cytogenetics demonstrated nearly identical OS and RFS outcomes. This study confirms that patients with AML and RUNX1mut had poor prognoses. Nonetheless, in de novo AML with intermediate-risk cytogenetics, the survival outcomes of both groups were comparable.
