Journal Information
Vol. 43. Issue S1.
Pages S181 (October 2021)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 43. Issue S1.
Pages S181 (October 2021)
Open Access
TRANSCRIPTOME ANALYSES REVEAL NEW MARKERS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT OF KMT2A (MLL)-REARRANGED LEUKEMIA
Visits
1190
BA Lopesa,α, CP Poubela,α, CE Teixeirab, A Caye-Eudec, H Cavéc, C Meyerd, R Marschalekd, M Boronib, M Emerencianoa
a Acute Leukemia RioSearch Group, Division of Clinical Research, Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
b Bioinformatics and Computational Biology Laboratory, Instituto Nacional de Câncer (INCA), Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brazil
c Department of Genetics, AP-HP Robert Debré, Paris Diderot University, Paris, France
d DCAL/Institute of Pharmaceutical Biology, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
This item has received

Under a Creative Commons license
Article information
Special issue
This article is part of special issue:
Vol. 43. Issue S1
More info
Introduction

KMT2A (MLL) gene rearrangements (KMT2A -r) are associated with diverse acute leukemias. Given the high number of KMT2A fusions, screening methods guide their detection regardless of partner gene. For instance, immunophenotyping using an anti-CSPG4 (NG2) antibody or split-signal fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) are routinely used for the identification of KMT2A -r. However, we recently revealed that certain KMT2A fusions (e.g. KMT2A-USP2) might be underestimated because tradicional methods often fail to detect them. Therefore, complementary methods are needed for appropriate detection of KMT2A -r. In addition, the standard treatment of KMT2A -r acute leukemias has not significantly improved outcomes, despite many years of international efforts. Thus, the urgent need for novel therapeutic strategies is unquestionable.

Objectives

Here we use a machine-learning model to unravel the most appropriate markers for prediction of KMT2A -r in all types of acute leukemia: AML, B-ALL, T-ALL, and ALAL. We also apply differential expression analysis using RNA-seq data to point out new therapeutic possibilities for KMT2A -r leukemia.

Methodology

Our analyses were performed on gene expression data from the TARGET project (n = 706; 73 KMT2A -r and 633 KMT2A -WT). We applied the BorutaSHAP variable selection to identify relevant predictors of KMT2A -r. After dividing our dataset into training (70%) and testing (30%) cohorts, a random forest model was trained for estimating KMT2A -r. Then, we performed an external validation in two independent cohorts: AML samples (n = 151) from the TCGA database, and ALL samples (n = 176) from the AP-HP, France. For the investigation of therapeutic targets and new drugs for KMT2A -r patients, we identified differentially expressed genes using RNA-seq data. Then, we performed pathway enrichment analysis and selection of candidate drugs using the Drug-Gene Interaction database, and overlapped results with the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer database.

Results

Our results revealed a set of 25 genes capable of accurately estimating KMT2A -r. They were significantly enriched in transcriptional misregulation in cancer (FDR ≤ 0.05). The oversampling method had the best combination of AUC, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity (0.931, 0.943, 0.917, 0.947, respectively) for estimating KMT2A -r. In other words, our model was able to predict 22 of 24 KMT2A -r patients and 178 of 188 KMT2A -WT patients. In the validation analyses, our model was able to correctly predict all eight KMT2A -r in AML (sensitivity = 1.000), but misclassified five of 11 KMT2A -r in ALL (sensitivity = 0.545). The LPAR3, SKIDA1, and MEIS1 overexpression were best associated with KMT2A -r compared to CSPG4 (NG 2), regardless of the type of acute leukemia. Of importance, high expression levels of LPAR3 estimated the occurrence of all KMT2A-USP2 fusions. Also, we identified 116 up-regulated genes in relapsed KMT2A -r acute leukemia, and 56 drug interactions with 13 genes. The KMT2A -r cell lines were more sensitive to foretinib treatment (Wilcoxon, p = 0.019) compared to KMT2A -WT.

Conclusions

In this study, we observed that our algorithm provided highly accurate predictions for KMT2A -r acute leukemias. Therefore, we provide valuable options for screening KMT2A -r in leukemia, including LPAR3, SKIDA1, and MEIS1 overexpression. We also reveal that foretinib should be further investigated as a therapeutic alternative in KMT2A -r acute leukemia.

Full text is only aviable in PDF

These authors share first authorship.

Idiomas
Hematology, Transfusion and Cell Therapy
Article options
Tools