Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2020 Jun;2(2):43-48.
doi: 10.2991/chi.d.200408.001. Epub 2020 Apr 19.

The Evolving Landscape of Myelodysplastic Syndrome Prognostication

Affiliations

The Evolving Landscape of Myelodysplastic Syndrome Prognostication

Jacob Shreve et al. Clin Hematol Int. 2020 Jun.

Abstract

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs) are potentially devastating monoclonal deviations of hematopoiesis that lead to bone marrow dysplasia and variable cytopenias. Predicting severity of disease progression and likelihood to undergo acute myeloid leukemia transformation is the basis of treatment strategy. Some patients belong to a low-risk cohort best managed with conservative supportive care, whereas others are included in a high-risk cohort that requires decisive therapy with hematopoietic cell transplantation or hypomethylating agent administration. Risk scoring systems for MDS prognostication were traditionally based on karyotype characteristics and clinical factors readily available from chart review, and validation was typically conducted on de novo MDS patients. However, retrospective analysis found a large subset of patients incorrectly risk-stratified. In this review, the most commonly used scoring systems are evaluated, and pitfalls therein are identified. Emerging technologies such as personal genomics and machine learning are then explored for efficacy in MDS risk modeling. Barriers to clinical adoption of artificial intelligence-derived models are discussed, with focus on approaches meant to increase model interpretability and clinical relevance. Finally, a guiding set of recommendations is proposed for best designing an accurate and universally applicable prognostic model for MDS, which is supported by more than 20 years of observation of traditional scoring system performance, as well as modern efforts in creating hybrid genomic-clinical scoring systems.

Keywords: Acute myeloid leukemia (AML); Machine learning; Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS); Prognostic model.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

CONFLICT OF INTEREST Authors disclose no conflict of interest of this work.

References

    1. Will B, Zhou L, Vogler TO, Ben-Neriah S, Schinke C, Tamari R, et al. Stem and progenitor cells in myelodysplastic syndromes show aberrant stage-specific expansion and harbor genetic and epigenetic alterations. Blood [Internet] 2012;120:2076–86. www.bloodjournal.org http://dx.doi.org/10.1182/blood-2011-12-399683. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Tefferi A, Vardiman JW. Myelodysplastic syndromes: MECHANISMS OF DISEASE. Hematol Cell Ther [Internet] 2009;38:363–80. www.nejm.org http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00282-996-0363-7. - DOI
    1. Greenberg PL, Stone RM, Al-Kali A, Barta SK, Bejar R, Bennett JM, et al. Myelodysplastic syndromes, version 2.2017: clinical practice guidelines in oncology. JNCCN. 2017;15:60–87. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2017.0007. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Malcovati L, Hellström-Lindberg E, Bowen D, Adès L, Cermak J, Del Cañizo C, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of primary myelodysplastic syndromes in adults: recommendations from the European Leukemia Net. Blood. 2013;122:2943–64. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-03-492884. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Sekeres MA, Cutler C. How we treat higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2014;123:829–36. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-08-496935. - DOI - PubMed