Introduction:TERT promoter (pTERT) variants are among the most frequent genetic alterations in human cancers, where they drive oncogenesis through telomerase reactivation. However, somatic, pathogenic pTERT variants have also been seen in non-cancerous conditions such as telomere biology disorders (TBD), where they attempt to rescue the bone marrow failure phenotype (adaptive compensation). We conducted this study to assess the phenotype and outcomes of pTERT mutations in TBD patients.

Methods: After IRB approval, the Mayo Clinic institutional TBD database was queried to identify all patients with somatic pTERT mutations. We have designed a customized error corrected sequencing panel that covers somatic mutations (52 genes) associated with adaptive and maladaptive outcomes in TBD patients. This covers the promoter region for TERT and can detect variants down to 0.5% variant allele fraction (VAF) with 10,000 X sequencing depth. Clinical data was retrospectively abstracted.

Results: We identified 7 pTERT variants (3 hotspots) in 6 (two females (33%), mean age 61 years, 4 alive). The three hotspots were: (1) c.-57A>C (2 individuals, mean VAF 17.1%; range 11.6%-22.6%), (2) c.-124C>T (4 individuals, mean VAF 12.9%; range 1.9%-41.3%), and (3) c.-146C>T (1 individual, VAF 1.2%). One individual had both the c.-124C>T (VAF 41.3%) and the c.-146C>T somatic pTERT variants, occurring in the context of a germline TERT variant. The median VAF for all 7 pTERT variants was 6.1% (range 1.2%-41.3%). The hotspot, c.-57A>C, occurred in the context of pathogenic germline TERT (VAF 49.9%) variants with pathogenic somatic co-variants in PPM1D (avg. VAF 1.5%). The second hotspot, c.-124C>T, occurred in the context of germline TERT (avg. VAF 49.6%) and RTEL1 (VAF 47.3%) variants with pathogenic somatic co-variants including ASXL1 (VAF 1%), DNMT3A (VAF 8%), and PPM1D (VAF 4%). Five of six assessable patients with pTERT variants had shortened telomere lengths (TL), with results pending for one individual. Among those with the c.-57A>C variant, granulocyte TLs were at or below the 10th percentile, while lymphocyte TLs were below the 10th percentile in one patient and below the 1st percentile in another. For those with the c.-124C>T variant, all granulocyte TLs were below the 1st percentile. Lymphocyte TLs in this group included one at the 10th percentile and two at or below the 1st percentile.

The median follow up for all patients was 2 years. Hotspot 1 (c.-57A>C) variants were associated with normocellular bone marrow biopsies with one patient having normal blood counts and the other having chronic macrocytic anemia (grade 2) and thrombocytopenia (< grade 1). In patients with hotspot 2 and 3 somatic variants, bone marrow cellularity ranged from 15–50% (1 patient had grade 2-3 hypocellularity), with normal bone marrow morphology, except for polytypic plasma cells (10–15%) identified in a patient with IgG kappa multiple myeloma (currently MRD negative on maintenance therapy). This patient also had a history of head and neck cancer and follicular lymphoma. Of these four patients, only one had normal blood counts (co-occurring c.-146C>T variant); the rest had cytopenias (n=3, the worst being grade 2 thrombocytopenia), progressive macrocytosis (n=3), or eosinophilia (n=1). Comorbidities encountered in these patients included myasthenia gravis (1), hypogonadism (1), and sarcoidosis (1). Moreover, four patients (2 each for hotspots 1 and 2) presented with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis, while liver fibrosis was seen in 4 patients (also 2 each for hotspots 1 and 2). At last follow up, none of these patients had documented progression to myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukemia.

Conclusions: We describe the spectrum and clinical features of somatic pTERT mutations in TBD patients. pTERT mutations involved the following hotspot regions, c.-124C>T, c.-146C>T, and c.-57A>C, and co-occurred with other somatic variants (i.e., PPM1D and DNMT3A). None of the 6 patients with pTERT mutations had a severe bone marrow failure phenotype or developed myeloid neoplasms at last follow up, exemplifying a unique mechanism of adaptive somatic rescue.

This content is only available as a PDF.
2025
Sign in via your Institution