Spliceosome Mutations Are Frequent In Patients With Myelodysplastic Syndromes Who Failed Hypomethylating Therapy: Possible Implications Of Spliceosome Inhibitors As Alternative Treatments

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogeneous group of blood cancers characterized by bone marrow (BM) failure, peripheral blood cytopenias, dysplasia, chromosomal abnormalities and an increased risk for transformation to acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Patients (pts) with higher risk disease are primarily treated with pharmacologic treatments like hypomethylating therapy (HMT) (5-azacytidine and decitabine). 5-azacytidine (AZA) and decitabine (DAC) can result in overall response rates of 36% with a median duration of response of 15 months and 17-21% with a median duration of response of 10 months, respectively. Pts refractory to HMT have poor outcomes with a median overall survival of ∼4 months. Spliceosome gene mutations are frequently found in certain subtypes of MDS specifically SF3B1 (∼28%), U2AF1 (6-12%) and SRSF2 (6-12%). The prognostic value of spliceosome mutations in different MDS subtypes has been largely investigated while the impact of these mutations on treatment response is still unknown. We aim to investigate the frequency of three commonly mutated spliceosome genes (SF3B1, U2AF1, and SRSF2) in pts who failed HMT in order to define mutational frequency and evaluate the feasibility of targeted therapy with next generation spliceosome inhibitors. We screened a cohort of 120 pts (MDS, 70; MDS/MPN, 33; MDS/sAML, 17; median age: 69; male/female: 85/35) that underwent HMT (AZA: 58; DAC: 21; AZA/DAC: 7; AZA/REV: 25; DAC/REV: 4; AZA/DAC/REV: 5). Forty-eight percent of pts failed HMT therapy as refractory or relapse. We performed Sanger sequencing on BM/peripheral blood DNA for known pathways involved in MDS pathogenesis including methylation (TET2, DNMT3A, IDH1/2), histone (ASXL1, UTX, EZH2), signaling (CBL, N/KRAS), transcription (RUNX1, TP53, JAK2), and RNA splicing (SF3B1, U2AF1, SRSF2). Data analysis was available for 90 pts. We detected a total of 131 mutations in different pathways. In total, spliceosome mutations were observed in 28/90 (31%) of pts. When we analyzed the presence of the mutations in relation to the rate of response, we found that pts who failed HMT have frequent spliceosome mutations: 17/58 (29%). We have reported that molecular mutations in TET2 and DNMT3A can predict response to treatment to HMT (Traina F, Blood (ASH Annual Meeting Abstracts), Nov 2011; 118: 461). Indeed, the frequency of mutations in methylation genes was lower in the group of pts who failed HMT (11/58; 18.9%) compared to pts who achieved hematological response (11/32; 34%). Spliceosome inhibitors have been proposed for targetted therapy in MDS. The presence of spliceosome mutations in pts who failed HMT can open a new era of investigation leading to the possibility of using spliceosome inhibitors in pts who fail conventional therapy. We performed RNA-sequencing analysis on BM cells of pts who failed HMT compared to pts who achieved hematological response (n=2 vs 2) in order to define any specific gene signature explaining the differences in response to HMT. We performed differential gene expression testing on 11,459 expressed genes. In total, 158 genes were differentially expressed at FDR < .2 in responders compared to not responders. We identified several interesting genes involved in tumorigenesis and epigenetic regulation such as YPEL3, and ST14, which were up-regulated in responders vs not responders (FC: 4 and 7.5; P<.00001). In sum, spliceosome mutations are frequent in pts who failed HMT and may affect downstream pathways most probably in the epigenetic network leading to differences in susceptibility to HMT and can open the possibility of treatment with spliceosome inhibitors.