Systemic mastocytosis with associated lymphoid neoplasms (SM-ALN): A distinct subset with indolent clinical course and favorable outcomes Free

Background:

The coexistence of systemic mastocytosis (SM) and lymphoid neoplasms is rare and remains poorly defined. These cases are classified under SM with associated hematologic neoplasm (SM-AHN) in the WHO framework, though the ICC distinguishes SM with associated myeloid neoplasm (SM-AMN) as a separate entity. Emerging evidence points to SM with associated lymphoid neoplasms (SM-ALN) as a biologically distinct and clinically indolent subgroup (Aperna F et al, 2025). We performed a multisite retrospective study to characterize the clinico-molecular features and outcomes of SM-ALN.

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective analysis across Mayo Clinic sites, reviewing records from January 1980 to December 2024 to identify patients with SM-ALN. IRB approval was obtained. Of 22 cases identified, 4 were excluded due to co-occurring myeloid neoplasms. The final cohort included 18 patients. Variables analysed included age, sex, SM subtype, KIT mutation, symptoms, treatment, and survival outcomes.

Results:

Eighteen patients were included (median age: 61.5 years; range: 38–80; 11 female). Most had indolent SM (ISM, n=16); two had aggressive SM (ASM). SM preceded the lymphoid neoplasm in 4 cases (22%), followed it in 6 (33%), and was concurrent in 8 (44%).

Low-grade lymphomas (n=12, 67%) included follicular lymphoma (n=2), CLL (, n=2), marginal zone (n=1), lymphoplasmacytic (n=1), and mantle cell (n=1). High-grade lymphomas (n=6, 33%) included diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL, n=3), Hodgkin lymphoma (n=2), and T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (n=1).

SM-related symptoms were present in 16 of 18 patients (89%). The most common manifestations included dermatologic symptoms (rash/pruritus, 56%), systemic complaints (fatigue/weight loss, 39%), GI symptoms (17%), and anaphylaxis (6%). KIT D816V testing mutation was positive in 10 of 16 patients tested (63%). Tryptase was elevated (>20 ng/mL) in 15 of 18 (83%). NGS data was available for 9 patients: among the two ASM cases, both harbored SRSF2 mutation; one also had JAK2, DNMT3A, RUNX1, TET2, and TP53, while the other carried DNMT3A and IDH1. Mutations observed in ISM cases included CCND3, CXCR4, NOTCH2, SF3B1, MYD88 L265P, ASXL1, and TET2.

SM management was divided into two categories: (1) Conservative approach, including observation alone in 4 patients (22%) and symptomatic therapies such as antihistamines or leukotriene inhibitors in 7 (39%); and (2) Cytoreductive treatments, comprising avapritinib in 5 patients (28%), cladribine in 1 (6%), and imatinib in 1 (6%). Management of lymphoid neoplasms included intensive regimens such as R-CHOP and hyper-CVAD for high-grade subtypes (e.g., DLBCL and T-ALL), while indolent forms (e.g., CLL and follicular lymphoma) were treated with bendamustine-rituximab or observation depending on disease burden. Overall, 13 patients (72%) received systemic therapy.

At a median follow-up of 81 months (6.7 years), 17 of 18 patients (94%) were alive and progression-free. Median OS and PFS were not reached. The sole death occurred in a patient with ASM, while all ISM cases remained alive. ASM was associated with a higher (though nonsignificant) risk of death (OR 33.0; 95% CI, 0.89–1220.9; p = 0.111). Among patients with high-grade lymphomas (n=5), 80% were alive at follow-up, compared to 100% with indolent lymphomas (n=13).

Discussion:

Our findings support SM-ALN as a clinically indolent and biologically distinct subset within SM-AHN. Most patients had ISM and low-grade lymphoid neoplasms, with favorable outcomes regardless of lymphoma subtype or diagnostic sequence. High-risk mutations were confined to ASM cases, reinforcing underlying biologic differences. These findings align with prior Mayo Clinic data showing longer survival in SM-ALN compared to SM-AMN (median OS 8.1 vs 2.0 years; p<0.01).

Treatment was primarily directed by the lymphoid malignancy, with limited need for cytoreduction in ISM. Larger, prospective studies are needed to confirm these observations and optimize management strategies.

Limitations include the study's retrospective, single-center design and limited racial diversity. Multi-institutional studies are warranted to validate these findings and guide optimal management.

Conclusion: SM-ALN is a rare but distinct SM subtype characterized by indolent behavior, favorable treatment responses, and prolonged survival. Recognition of this subset is critical to avoid over-treatment and to guide risk-adapted management strategies.