Abstract
This review addresses changes and updates in eosinophilic disorders under the International Consensus Classification (ICC). The previous category of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia (M/LN-eo) and a specific gene rearrangement is changed to M/LN-eo with tyrosine kinase gene fusions to reflect the underlying genetic lesions. Two new members, M/LN-eo with ETV6::ABL1 fusion and M/LN-eo with various FLT3 fusions, have been added to the category; and M/LN-eo with PCM1::JAK2 and its genetic variants ETV6::JAK2 and BCR::JAK2 are recognized as a formal entity from their former provisional status. The updated understanding of the clinical and molecular genetic features of PDGFRA, PDGFRB and FGFR1 neoplasms is summarized. Clear guidance as to how to distinguish these fusion gene–associated disorders from the overlapping entities of Ph-like B-acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL), de novo T-ALL, and systemic mastocytosis is provided. Bone marrow morphology now constitutes one of the diagnostic criteria of chronic eosinophilic leukemia, NOS (CEL, NOS), and idiopathic hypereosinophilia/hypereosinophilic syndrome (HE/HES), facilitating the separation of a true myeloid neoplasm with characteristic eosinophilic proliferation from those of unknown etiology and not attributable to a myeloid neoplasm.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
In adults, peripheral blood (PB) eosinophilia is defined by ≥ 0.5 × 109/L eosinophils and hypereosinophilia (HE) by ≥ 1.5 × 109/L. Tissue eosinophilia is defined by increased eosinophils or signs of eosinophil degranulation beyond the normal range for the particular sites [1]. A definition of BM eosinophilia has been proposed to require ≥ 20% eosinophils, with or without PB eosinophilia. Hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is defined as peripheral blood (PB) hypereosinophilia in association with tissue/organ damage [1]. The causes of eosinophilia are broad and can be reactive (majority), neoplastic, or idiopathic [2, 3]. In eosinophilia associated with a hematopoietic neoplasm, eosinophils often bear the same molecular genetic aberrations as their progenitors and/or other myeloid components [4]. These hematopoietic neoplasms can be further categorized into three large groups: (1) myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia (M/LN-eo) and recurrent genetic rearrangements such as PDGFRA, PDGFRB, FGFR1, or PCM1::JAK2 [5]; (2) eosinophilia associated with another well-defined myeloid neoplasm, such as chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with inversion of chromosome 16; and (3) chronic eosinophilic leukemia (CEL), not otherwise specified (NOS) [5]. This current review highlights the updates in the International Consensus Classification (ICC) [6] on eosinophilic disorders, mainly in the category of M/LN-eo and recurrent genetic rearrangements and the further refinement of the definitions for CEL, NOS, and idiopathic HE/HES.
Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions
M/LN-eo and rearrangements of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, and FGFR1 were recognized as a standalone category in the 2008 WHO classification of myeloid neoplasms [7]. M/LN-eo with PCM1::JAK2 fusion was added to this family as a provisional entity in the 2016 WHO classification. The common features shared among the members in this category include: (1) constitutive tyrosine kinase (TK) signaling as a result of a gene fusion; (2) origin from mutated pluripotent bone marrow (BM) stem cells that can differentiate into myeloid and/or lymphoid progenies, leading to clinically complex and heterogeneous manifestations; (3) frequent association with PB and/or tissue eosinophilia; and (4) excellent responses of some entities to specific TK inhibitors (TKI).
The category name is changed to M/LN-eo with TK-gene fusions (M/LN-eo-TK) in the ICC [6] and applies to instances bearing the respective genetic aberration at the initial presentation and not to other well-defined hematopoietic neoplasms that have acquired such abnormalities later in the course of disease. The name change emphasizes the molecular genetic changes underlying these hematopoietic neoplasms that lead to constitutive TK signaling amenable to targeted therapy [3, 8]. Additional important changes made in this disease category are the inclusion of M/LN with t(9;12)(q34;p13)/ETV6::ABL1 and FLT3-rearrangements as new members and promoting PCM1::JAK2 and its genetic variants ETV6::JAK2 and BCR::JAK2 as formal entities from their provisional state in the 2016 WHO classification. The update also provides clear guidance on how to distinguish M/LN-eo presenting as B- or T-acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) from Philadelphia (Ph)-like B-ALL or de novo T-ALL, and M/LN-eo with mast cell proliferation from systemic mastocytosis.
Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with ETV6::ABL1/t(9;12)(q34.1;p13.2) fusion
ETV6::ABL1 fusions have been reported in various hematologic malignancies, including B- or T-ALL, AML, and chronic myeloid neoplasms (CMN) such as myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm (MDS/MPN) [9,10,11,12,13]. In the 44 cases summarized by Zaliova and colleagues [12], half (22/44, 50%) were ALL (20 B-ALL and 2 T-ALL) and more than half occurred in infants or pediatric patients. Interestingly, although these ALL cases presented with high white blood cell counts (WBCs), eosinophilia was only reported in 3/13 patients. Of note, ETV6::ABL1 fusion was reported to occur in 0.17% of pediatric B-ALL [14], and 0.38% of adult B-ALL, and comprised approximately 1–2% Ph-like B-ALL [12]. The two aforementioned T-ALL cases also occurred in pediatric patients as de novo disease. These cases should be categorized as Ph-like B-ALL and de novo T-ALL with ETV6::ABL1 if there is not a prior, concurrent or post-treatment myeloid neoplasm, and not as M/LN-eo.
Cases that should be considered for categorization as M/LN-eo most often present as CMN and rarely as AML with ETV6::ABL1. CMN with ETV6::ABL1 shows clinicopathological features reminiscent of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) with eosinophilia; however, some cases may resemble atypical CML (aCML) or essential thrombocythemia [9]. Patients often present with an elevated WBC, eosinophilia (> 90% cases), and many also with increased basophils (> 1%, up to 10%). Eosinophilia may not be prominent at initial diagnosis but eventually emerges at relapse or disease progression. Common findings in the BM include hypercellularity, a markedly increased M:E ratio and increased eosinophils. Megakaryocyte morphology is highly variable and ranges from normal forms to small, large, or a mixture of small and large forms. Dysgranulopoiesis and dyserythropoiesis are uncommon, while increased fibrosis is quite common. Most patients present in chronic phase, and, to a much lesser extent, in myeloblastic or lymphoblastic phase. A few cases of AML or myeloid sarcoma (Fig. 1) with this fusion are reported, all associated with eosinophilia. However, it is unclear if these cases arose de novo or as a myeloblastic phase of myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN).
ETV6::ABL1 fusion results from a complex rearrangement involving a translocation and inversion or an insertion of ETV6 in 9q34 or ABL1 in 12p13. The fusion is often cryptic; thus, fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) analysis using ETV6 and ABL1 break-apart probes and/or RNA-sequencing (RNA seq) technology are needed for detection. The alternative splicing generates two fusion transcripts—type A (without ETV6 exon 5) and type B (with exon 5); the latter of which is significantly more common. Although both transcripts result in constitutive chimeric TK functionality, type B has higher kinase activity due to a direct SH2 domain of the GRB2 binding site on ETV6 exon 5, enhancing the PI3-kinase and MAP-kinase pathways [15]. ABL1 has also been reported to fuse with alternate partners [16]; however, most of these cases present as Ph–like B-ALL [17] or de novo T-ALL [18]. Therefore, for the time being, only ETV6::ABL1 M/LN-eo is included in this category. With the increased use of RNA seq in clinical samples, ABL1 fusions with other partner genes (including cryptic lesions) with clinical features of M/LN-eo may be discovered.
Somatic mutations detected by next generation sequencing (NGS) are reported in approximately 50% of cases [9, 11, 19], including ARID2, TP53, SETD2, CDKN1B, PTPN11, and SMC1A genes. Due to the rarity of this disease and only a few cases being tested, the biological role of these mutations is unclear.
Patients with ETV6::ABL1 have shown various responses to TKI targeted therapy [9,10,11,12,13]. Second- or 3rd-generation TKI [10] appear to be superior to the first-generation imatinib. Durable hematological and molecular remissions have been observed in a significant number of patients presenting in chronic phase but not CMN in blast phase. Disease progression is reported in around 30% patients, which can progress to myeloblastic or lymphoblastic phase or myeloid sarcoma, and in such occasions, the prognosis is dismal despite the addition of TKI to the standard chemotherapy.
Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with FLT3/t(v;13q12) rearrangements
FLT3 is located on chromosome 13q12 and belongs to the receptor TK (RTK) subclass III family. FLT3 rearrangement in hematolymphoid neoplasms is uncommon with around 30 cases reported [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34]. The most common is ETV6::FLT3/t(12;13)(p13;q12), which is not cryptic if adequate metaphases are obtained for analysis. Other partner genes reported are ZMYM2/13q12 [25, 28], TRIP11/14q32 [24], SPTBN1/2p16 [30], GOLGB1/3q13 [23], CCDC88C/14q32 [31], MYO18A/17q12 [29], and BCR/22q11. There are a number of uncharacterized partner genes, for example, rearrangement t(13q12;v) (3q27, 5q15, 5q35, 7q36, 13q22) [32, 34]. Some of the fusions are cryptic, such as ZMYM2::FLT3 [25, 28], and require FISH or RNA seq for identification.
FLT3-rearranged cases often present as MPN with eosinophilia, or as MDS/MPN resembling chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), a typical CML (aCML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia, or systemic mastocytosis associated with hematological malignancy. Extramedullary involvement is very frequent and includes diagnostic entities including T-ALL/LBL, mixed phenotype leukemia, myeloid sarcoma, and, rarely, T cell lymphoma or B-ALL/LBL.
Mutations detected by NGS have been assessed in a small number of cases. Such aberrations occur in approximately 40–50% of cases [34], including ASXL1, PTPN11, RUNX1, SETBP1, SRSF2, STAT5B, TET2, TP53, and U2AF1 genes. The significance of these mutations is unknown.
Of the reported cases, 9 patients received a FLT3 inhibitor, sunitinib or sorafenib [21, 25, 26, 28, 31, 33, 34]. Rapid hematological improvements with or without complete cytogenetic response to sunitinib or sorafenib monotherapy have been observed. Some patients achieved a sustained remission; some lived with stable disease; and some received allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HSCT). Loss of response may occur due to acquired FLT3 N841K mutation in the activation loop of the TK domain [21].
Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with PCM1::JAK2/t(8;9)(p22;p24.1) fusion
M/LN-eo with PCM1::JAK2 fusion [35,36,37] and its genetic variants was proposed as a provisional entity in the 2016 WHO classification. Subsequently, several studies have described the disease spectrum and histopathological and molecular genetic features of these disorders [10, 38,39,40,41]. Affected patients are mostly in the later 40s (years of age), exhibit a pronounced male predominance, and approximately 60% present with MPN or MDS/MPN [42], which is commonly accompanied by eosinophilia, hepatosplenomegaly, and occasionally basophilia. Some cases may initially present as B-lymphoblastic crisis. Extramedullary disease involvement is common. It is known that PCM1::JAK2 can be acquired at disease progression, such as an AML at relapse. Importantly, these should not be considered in the category of M/LN-eo [38, 39]. De novo AML is extremely rare. For patients presenting as CMN, the disease may be indolent, with a reported 5-year survival around 80% [36, 38, 39, 42]. However, for patients who present with increased blasts or blast phase or progress to acute leukemia, the prognosis is poor. Targeted therapy with JAK2 inhibitors such as ruxolitinib has produced clinical responses in patients presenting in chronic phase but the response may be short lived with limited survival benefit [10, 38, 43,44,45]. HSCT provides ultimate cure for these patients.
The BM of PCM1::JAK2 is usually hypercellular with increased eosinophils, increased immature erythroid precursors (pronormoblasts) in aggregates or sheets, and increased fibrosis. The presence of “erythroid microtumors” accompanied by eosinophilia and increased fibrosis in a male patient presenting with a MPN or MDS/MPN-like disorder is virtually pathognomonic and should prompt a presumptive diagnosis of M/LN-eo with JAK2-fusion (Fig. 2). “Erythroid microtumors” are also frequently observed in extramedullary lesions, and some have been diagnosed as erythroblastic sarcoma [38,39,40].
M/LN-eo with alternate partners to JAK2 such as t(9;12)(p24.1;p13.2)/ETV6::JAK2 and t(9;22)(p24.1;q11.2)/BCR::JAK2 [10, 38, 39, 41] show less distinctive histopathological features, such as the characteristic large immature erythroid islands. However, they demonstrate similar clinical and genetic features, and are considered as genetic variants of t(8;9)(p22;p24.1)/PCM1::JAK2. JAK2 fusions with other partner genes, such as t(5;9)(q14.1; p24.1)/STRN3::JAK2 [46], and PAX5::JAK2 [47] are usually seen in Ph-like B-ALL; which are, per definition, not M/LN-eo.
Mutations detected by NGS in PCM1::JAK2 M/LN-eo are reported to range from 14 to 50% of cases studied [38, 39, 48] and include ASXL1, TET2, and BCOR genes. Mutations appear to be lower in cases presenting as MPN and higher in cases presenting as acute leukemia.
M/LN-eo with t(8;9)(p22;p24.1)/PCM1::JAK2 is now accepted as a formal entity under M/LN-eo with TK fusion by ICC, and t(9;12)(p24.1;p13.2)/ETV6::JAK2 and t(9;22)(p24.1;q11.2)/BCR::JAK2 are recognized as genetic variants.
M/LN-eo with PDGFRA, PBGFRB, and FGFR1 rearrangements
M/LN-eo with PDGFRA, PBGFRB, and FGFR1 rearrangements represent the three original members in the category of M/LN-eo. Since their initial inclusion, there has been an expanded understanding of the clinical features and cytogenetic characteristics. PDGFRA-rearranged cases are by far the most common in this category of M/LN-eo and show a very striking male predominance (male-to-female ratio of 17:1). The usual age at onset is in the late 40s, but pediatric patients may be affected [49], and the disease may occur in the therapy-related setting. Eosinophilia is common, 70–90%, frequently with hypereosinophilia. High level of vitamin B12 is often observed, and serum tryptase may be elevated. BM is often hypercellular with eosinophilia. Megakaryocytes are often decreased, may or may not exhibit dyspoietic changes, and fibrosis is common (Fig. 3A and B). Splenomegaly occurs in approximately 60% patients, and extramedullary tumors in approximately 50%. The latter are mostly myeloid, either mature or immature (myeloid sarcoma), and occasional lymphoblastic, commonly involving epidural and paraspinal space or lymph nodes.
The disease-defining interstitial deletion of approximately 800 kb (including CHIC2) on chromosome 4q12 that leads to the FIP1L1::PDGFRA fusion is below the level of resolution of conventional cytogenetics (e.g., cryptic). Routine detection of the interstitial deletion is best achieved by FISH or RT-PCR. On the other hand, fusions with 6 other partner genes, including CDK5RAP2::PDGFRA, ETV6::PDGFRA, FOXP1::PDGFRA, KIF5B::PDGFRA, STRN::PDGFRA, and TNKS2::PDGFRA, are often not cryptic. BCR::PDGFRA/ t(4;22)(q12;q11) cases may have a clinical presentation similar to CML or aCML with marked leukocytosis [50]. Cases with activating point mutations of PDGFRA have been reported [51]; however, it is unsure if all CMN with PDGFRA are within the spectrum of M/LN-eo.
Almost all patients with a PDGFRA fusion are sensitive to imatinib. Primary or secondary resistance is unusual, but if it occurs, it is linked to the T674I or D842V mutation within the ATP-binding domain of PDGFRA [52, 53]. Such patients have been shown to be responsive to 2nd- or 3rd- generation TKI [54] or FLT3 inhibitors [53].
Within the category of M/LN-eo, PDGFRB rearranged cases are the second most common. There is a male-to-female ratio of 2:1 with the usual age of onset also being in the late 40s (similar to PDGFRA). In addition, it also can occur in the therapy-related setting. In contrast to PDGFRA- rearranged cases, M/LN-eo with PDGFRB fusions may present with monocytosis, resembling CMML, and some may display a cytopenic presentation without eosinophilia, resembling MDS [39].
The PDGFRB gene is located at 5q31 ~ 33, and more than 30 partner fusion genes have been described to date [3]. Typically, PDGFRB rearranged M/LN-Eo should demonstrate a 5q32 abnormality by conventional cytogenetic analysis if 20 adequate metaphases are obtained for analysis. However, recent studies have shown that cryptic PDGFRB rearrangements are common [39, 55] and often occur in partner genes other than t(5;12)(q32;p13.2)/ETV6::PDGFRB, such as DIAPH1::PDGFRB [28], BCR::PDGFRB [56], AFAP1L1::PDGFRB, SART3::PDGFRB and G3BP1::PDGFRB [57]. Importantly, some of the fusions may not even be detected by FISH, and consequently RNA seq is required for identification. All reported PDGFRB rearranged cases, regardless of partner genes, are sensitive for TKI therapy.
M/LN-eo with FGFR1 rearangement is very uncommon. The male-to-female ratio is 1.5:1. The usual age at onset is in the 30s [58, 59]. B-symptoms, lymphadenopathy, and hepatosplenomegaly are common, especially in patients with T-LBL/ALL. Accompanying eosinophilia is seen in 60–70% of cases, especially in patients with a MPN-like presentation. Cases with an acute leukemic presentation or extramedullary lesions may fulfill criteria of T-ALL, B-ALL, or mixed phenotype acute leukamia (MPAL). In such instances, the background features of MPN may be obscured by the blasts and become more obvious post myeloablative treatment. M/LN-eo associated with t(8;13)(p11;q12)/ZMYM2::FGFR1 frequently presents with nodal (or extranodal) disease with a T-LBL component admixed with scattered or perivascular myeloid blasts, termed “bilineal lymphoma” [39, 60]; an eosinophilic infiltrate is frequently present and may provide a hint for the diagnosis.
Conventional cytogenetic analysis is reliable in demonstrating translocations at 8p11. The t(8;13) is the most common translocation, and, thus, ZMYM2 is the most common fusion-partner of FGFR1, but there are 14 additional fusion partners. The clinicopathological manifestations may differ according to these; e.g., patients with t(8;22)(p11.2;q11.2)/BCR::FGFR1 usually manifest with monocytosis and B-ALL (B-lymphoblastic phase) [61], while approximately half of the affected with t(8;9) (p12;q33)/CEP110::FGFR1 display monocytosis and tonsil hypertrophy [62].
Unlike M/LN-eo with PDGFRA and PDGFRB fusions, FGFR1- rearranged neoplasms are usually not responsive to imatinib. Clinical trials with 3rd-generation TKI (ponatinib) and the FGFR inhibitor pemigatinib are promising [63], yet HSCT remains the only curative option [64].
Mutations detected by NGS are reported in 20–50% of cases with PDGFRA M/LN-eo [39, 48] including ASXL1, BCOR, DNMT3A, ETV6, SRSF2, and RUNX1 genes. A similar mutation frequency is reported in PDGFRB M/LN-eo, 30–50%, involving ASXL1, TET2, BCOR, ETV6, STAG2, and RUNX1 genes [39, 48, 65]. Mutations in FGFR1 rearranged cases are highly frequent, detected in 70–80% of cases, and typically (80%) involve RUNX1 [48, 66]. RUNX1 mutations have been significantly associated with an acute leukemic presentation or progression [66]. The common clinical presentations, molecular genetic alternations, responses to TKI treatment of M/LN-eo are summarized in Table 1.
Addressing the overlap of M/LN-eo-TK with other entities
It is known that an abnormal mast cell proliferation can be seen in M/LN-eo with any of the recurrent fusion genes, particularly in PDGFRA fusion cases (Fig. 3C). In most instances, the mast cells are scattered, are spindle shaped, and show aberrant CD25 expression. In some cases, the mast cell proliferation may form dense clusters, showing histopathological features of systemic mastocytosis (SM) (Fig. 3D) [24, 34, 39, 67,68,69]. Pardanani and colleagues [69] studied 19 cases of SM with concomitant hypereosinophilia, and over 50% of cases (10/19, 56%) were found to have the FIP1L1::PDGFRA fusion. Importantly, these cases consistently lacked the KIT D816V mutation and did not behave or exhibit features of typical SM. Therefore, categorization of these rare cases as SM is problematic. In the current ICC, such cases are classified under M/LN-eo if one of the TK gene fusions is detected [6]. As such, it is highly recommended to test cases of mast cell disease for rearrangements of the TK genes when SM is associated with eosinophilia or the KIT D816V mutation is absent.
M/LN-eo also can overlap with Ph-like B-ALL/LBL or de novo T-ALL with rearrangements involving one of the TK genes. For example, while the most common genetic variant of PDGFRB, t(5;12)(q32;p13.2)/ETV6::PDGFRB, often manifests with multilineage involvement and features of M/LN-eo, PDGFRB rearrangements with alternate partners such as EBF1, SSBP2, TNIP1, ZEB2, and ATF7IP often present as de novo B-ALL, and are thus best classified as Ph-like B-ALL [70]. ETV6::JAK2 is now formally accepted as a genetic variant of PCM1::JAK2, and the entity should be limited to cases with an involvement of myeloid cells. If a case with a lymphoblastic presentation, an underlying myeloid neoplasm needs to be demonstrated. In fact, of the reported cases of hematopoietic neoplasms with ETV6::JAK2 fusion, more than half were de novo B-ALL or de novo T-ALL [36, 71] without an associated CMN, and such cases should be classified as Ph-like B-ALL or de novo T-ALL [70, 72]. As a rule, cases being classified as M/LN-eo-TK with presentation as B- or T-ALL, the TK fusion genes should involve the myeloid lineage in addition to lymphoblasts. Often, patients have a CMN that manifests either prior to, concomitantly, or post therapy for ALL. In performing FISH, the fusion signals are not only observed in blasts but also in segmented neutrophils, providing strong evidence of multilineage involvement [73]. A road map (Fig. 4) is provided to illustrate the basic principles in distinguishing these two categories of diseases.
Chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified and idiopathic hypereosinophilia/hypereosinophilic syndrome
CEL, NOS is a myeloid neoplasm included in the category of MPN. It is characterized by persistent eosinophilia not meeting the criteria for other genetically defined entities. Idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (iHES) is defined as persistent HE (≥ 6 months) with associated tissue/organ damage/injury due directly to eosinophil-released cytokines or enzymes, and the underlying cause, either reactive or a distinct clonal myeloid process, cannot be identified. Idiopathic HE or HE of unknown significance (HEus) [74] is referred to as persistent HE of unknown etiology without related organ/tissue damage. In the 2008 WHO classification, CEL, NOS was distinguished from idiopathic HE/HES by the presence of increased blasts and/or the presence of clonal karyotypic abnormalities. With the advent of NGS in hematopoietic neoplasms, somatic mutations associated with myeloid neoplasms have been detected in 25–30% of patients who have persistent hypereosinophilia [75,76,77,78], a normal karyotype, and no increase in blasts, and who would be otherwise considered as “iHES.” Mutations detected by NGS were found mostly in genes involved in DNA methylation and chromatin modification, such as ASXL1, TET2, EZH2, and DNMT3A, but also in other genes such as SRSF2, TP53, and SETBP1 [75,76,77, 79]. STAT5B N642H [78] has been reported in some patients with a referral diagnosis of eosinophilia (1.6%), including patients who would be otherwise diagnosed with iHES. While STAT5B mutations can help to establish clonality and facilitate a diagnosis of CEL, NOS, STAT5B mutations can be seen in other myeloid neoplasms without a prominent eosinophilic proliferation and are felt not unique for CEL, NOS.
Overall, while a positive mutation by NGS provides evidence of clonality, such mutations have also been reported in aging individuals lacking evidence of a myeloid neoplasm. Indeed, some cases with a very typical clinical course of iHES/HEus and normal BM morphology have been reported to carry somatic mutations [79, 80]. On the other hand, some true CEL, NOS, even the ones with karyotypic abnormalities, may not show detectable mutation tested by the myeloid neoplasm-targeted NGS panels [2, 79, 80].
In CEL, NOS, the BM is usually markedly hypercellular due to a prominent proliferation of eosinophils and granulocytic cells. Megakaryocytes are almost always abnormal, frequently showing MDS-type small hypolobated forms or a mixture of MDS-like and MPN-like megakaryocytes (Fig. 5). Given that the eosinophil proliferation can be quite significant, it is critical to carefully search for abnormal megakaryocytes in such cases. Dysgranulopoiesis and/or dyserythropoiesis may be present in some cases. MF2 or MF3 fibrosis is seen in 20–30% patients. These features were similar to those seen in MDS or MDS/MPN. Although not entirely specific, significant cytologic abnormalities in eosinophils (≥ 20% of eosinophils) are frequently observed in CEL, NOS patients [79, 80], including abnormal granulation (hypogranular, uneven granulation), abnormal nuclear lobation (multilobation, hypolobation, nuclear branching), and large or markedly left-shifted forms (Fig. 5). Such BM features have been found extremely valuable in identifying cases with clinical and biological features, and the natural history of a myeloid neoplasm [80]. In contrast, the BM of iHES and HEus is, except for increased eosinophils, largely morphologically unremarkable (Fig. 6) [79,80,81]. A key update in the ICC is that abnormal BM histopathology is now incorporated into the diagnostic criteria for CEL, NOS Table 2). This allows for a more evidence-based support of the neoplastic nature of CEL, NOS [6], and a more definitive separation from iHES/HEus (Table 3). Of note, the somatic mutations in iHES/iHES are often present as either a single gene alteration (often involving the DTA genes DNMT3A, TET2 and ASXL1) and/or at a relatively low variant allele frequency (VAF) [79, 80]. Clinical features may also help to distinguish CEL, NOS from iHES [75, 79, 80]: CEL, NOS patients are older, with higher WBCs and absolute eosinophil counts, often display cytopenia(s), exhibit frequent constitutional symptoms, hepatosplenomegaly, and high LDH. In contrast, iHES patients are significantly younger, with more allergic or rheumatoid symptoms, and skin rash, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, and /or endocrine involvement. Ideally, a diagnosis of CEL, NOS is supported by the presence of clonal molecular genetic abnormalities and abnormal BM findings or increased blasts. However, in some cases, clonal cytogenetic or molecular alterations may not be demonstrated with current testing methods. In such instances, after other causes of eosinophilia have been exhaustively excluded, abnormal BM findings reminiscent of MDS or MDS/MPN suffice to establish a diagnosis of CEL, NOS in the presence of persistent and unrelenting hypereosinophilia.
There is a caveat when interpreting a “high” eosinophil count. When the WBC is high, a small percentage of eosinophils may, by default, amount to an absolute eosinophil count ≥ 1.5 × 109/L. In the ICC update, both CEL, NOS and iHES/HEus are now required not only to show an absolute eosinophil count ≥ 1.5 × 109/L, but also relative eosinophilia (≥ 10%). This change emphasizes that there needs to be a characteristic feature of eosinophilic proliferation in such disorders. As a result, if a CMN shows a relative and absolute eosinophilia without defining genetic lesions, a diagnosis of CEL, NOS would supersede a diagnosis of aCML, MDS/MPN-U, or MPN-U.
In summary, the changes and updates related to eosinophilic disorders in the ICC are highlighted and elaborated with literature support in this review. The updates in M/LN-eo involve the following: (1) change of the category name from M/LN-eo with gene rearrangement to myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusion; (2) additions of ETV6::ABLI and FLT3 fusions as new members; (3) recognition of PCM1::JAK2 and its genetic variant BCR::JAK2 and ETV6::JAK2 as formal entity; and (4) provide guidance in distinguishing M/LN-eo from Ph-like B-ALL and de novo T-ALL, and address the issue of mast cell proliferation with TK fusions. The changes in CEL, NOS and iHES/HEus are to include BM morphology in the diagnostic criteria and require not only absolute but also relative eosinophilia in the definition. These changes are evidence based; reflect a consensus based on disease genetic, histopathological, and clinical features; and will impact the diagnosis and clinical management of patients (Table 2 and 3).
References
Valent P et al (2012) Contemporary consensus proposal on criteria and classification of eosinophilic disorders and related syndromes. J Allergy Clin Immunol 130(3):607–61 e9
Hu Z et al (2018) A multimodality work-up of patients with Hypereosinophilia. Am J Hematol 93(11):1337–1346
Shomali W, Gotlib J (2022) World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2022 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management. Am J Hematol 97(1):129–148
Butt NM et al (2017) Guideline for the investigation and management of eosinophilia. Br J Haematol 176(4):553–572
Arber DA et al (2016) The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood 127(20):2391–2405
Arber DA et al (2022) International consensus classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia: integrating morphological, clinical, and genomic data. Blood. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood.2022015850
Bain, BJ, Gilliland, DG, Horny, HP, Vardiman, JW. (2008) Myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and abnormalities of PDGFRA, PDGFRB or FGFR1, in WHO Classification of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues, SH. Swerdlow, Campo, E, Harris, NL, Jaffe, ES, Pileri, SA, Stein, H, Thiele, J, Vardiman, JW, Editor. 2008, International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC): Lyon. p. 68 - 73.
Reiter A, Gotlib J (2017) Myeloid neoplasms with eosinophilia. Blood 129(6):704–714
Yao J et al (2021) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia/ basophilia and ETV6-ABL1 fusion: cell-of-origin and response to tyrosine kinase inhibition. Haematologica 106(2):614–618
Schwaab J et al (2020) Response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors in myeloid neoplasms associated with PCM1-JAK2, BCR-JAK2 and ETV6-ABL1 fusion genes. Am J Hematol 95(7):824–833
Xie W et al (2018) Myeloproliferative neoplasm with ABL1/ETV6 rearrangement mimics chronic myeloid leukemia and responds to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Cancer Genet 228–229:41–46
Zaliova M et al (2016) Characterization of leukemias with ETV6-ABL1 fusion. Haematologica 101(9):1082–1093
Perna F et al (2011) ETV6-ABL1-positive “chronic myeloid leukemia”: clinical and molecular response to tyrosine kinase inhibition. Haematologica 96(2):342–343
Janssen JW et al (1995) The fusion of TEL and ABL in human acute lymphoblastic leukaemia is a rare event. Br J Haematol 90(1):222–224
Million RP et al (2004) A direct binding site for Grb2 contributes to transformation and leukemogenesis by the Tel-Abl (ETV6-Abl) tyrosine kinase. Mol Cell Biol 24(11):4685–4695
Ernst T et al (2011) Identification of FOXP1 and SNX2 as novel ABL1 fusion partners in acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Br J Haematol 153(1):43–46
Tasian SK, Loh ML, Hunger SP (2017) Philadelphia chromosome-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood 130(19):2064–2072
De Braekeleer E et al (2011) ABL1 fusion genes in hematological malignancies: a review. Eur J Haematol 86(5):361–371
Cessna MH et al (2019) Chronic myelomonocytic leukemia with ETV6-ABL1 rearrangement and SMC1A mutation. Cancer Genet 238:31–36
Hosseini N et al (2014) ETV6/FLT3 fusion in a mixed-phenotype acute leukemia arising in lymph nodes in a patient with myeloproliferative neoplasm with eosinophilia. J Hematopath 7:7
Walz C et al (2011) Response of ETV6-FLT3-positive myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia to inhibitors of FMS-like tyrosine kinase 3. Blood 118(8):2239–2242
Chonabayashi K et al (2014) Successful allogeneic stem cell transplantation with long-term remission of ETV6/FLT3-positive myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia. Ann Hematol 93(3):535–537
Troadec E et al (2017) A novel t(3;13)(q13;q12) translocation fusing FLT3 with GOLGB1: toward myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of FLT3? Leukemia 31(2):514–517
Chung A et al (2017) A novel TRIP11-FLT3 fusion in a patient with a myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with eosinophilia. Cancer Genet 216–217:10–15
Munthe-Kaas, MC, et al. (2020) Partial Response to Sorafenib in a Child With a Myeloid/Lymphoid Neoplasm, Eosinophilia, and a ZMYM2-FLT3 Fusion. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol
Falchi L et al (2014) ETV6-FLT3 fusion gene-positive, eosinophilia-associated myeloproliferative neoplasm successfully treated with sorafenib and allogeneic stem cell transplant. Leukemia 28(10):2090–2092
Vu HA et al (2006) FLT3 is fused to ETV6 in a myeloproliferative disorder with hypereosinophilia and a t(12;13)(p13;q12) translocation. Leukemia 20(8):1414–1421
Jawhar M et al (2017) Cytogenetically cryptic ZMYM2-FLT3 and DIAPH1-PDGFRB gene fusions in myeloid neoplasms with eosinophilia. Leukemia 31(10):2271–2273
Zhang, H, et al. (2018) Two myeloid leukemia cases with rare FLT3 fusions. Cold Spring Harb Mol Case Stud. 4(6)
Grand FH et al (2007) A constitutively active SPTBN1-FLT3 fusion in atypical chronic myeloid leukemia is sensitive to tyrosine kinase inhibitors and immunotherapy. Exp Hematol 35(11):1723–1727
Chao AK et al (2020) Fusion driven JMML: a novel CCDC88C-FLT3 fusion responsive to sorafenib identified by RNA sequencing. Leukemia 34(2):662–666
Tzankov A et al (2008) Systemic mastocytosis with associated myeloproliferative disease and precursor B lymphoblastic leukaemia with t(13;13)(q12;q22) involving FLT3. J Clin Pathol 61(8):958–961
Shao H et al (2020) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and FLT3 rearrangement. Leuk Res 99:106460
Tang G et al (2021) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with FLT3 rearrangement. Mod Pathol 34(9):1673–1685
Reiter A et al (2005) The t(8;9)(p22;p24) is a recurrent abnormality in chronic and acute leukemia that fuses PCM1 to JAK2. Cancer Res 65(7):2662–2667
Bain BJ, Ahmad S (2014) Should myeloid and lymphoid neoplasms with PCM1-JAK2 and other rearrangements of JAK2 be recognized as specific entities? Br J Haematol 166(6):809–817
Heiss S et al (2005) Myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative disease with erythropoietic hyperplasia (erythroid preleukemia) and the unique translocation (8;9)(p23;p24): first description of a case. Hum Pathol 36(10):1148–1151
Tang G et al (2019) Hematopoietic neoplasms with 9p24/JAK2 rearrangement: a multicenter study. Mod Pathol 32(4):490–498
Pozdnyakova O et al (2021) Myeloid/Lymphoid Neoplasms Associated With Eosinophilia and Rearrangements of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or With PCM1-JAK2. Am J Clin Pathol 155(2):160–178
Luedke C, Rein L (2020) Transformation to erythroblastic sarcoma from myeloid neoplasm with PCM1-JAK2. Blood 136(9):1113
Chen JA et al (2021) Lymphoid blast transformation in an MPN with BCR-JAK2 treated with ruxolitinib: putative mechanisms of resistance. Blood Adv 5(17):3492–3496
Kaplan, HG, et al.(2022) PCM1-JAK2 Fusion Tyrosine Kinase Gene-Related Neoplasia: A Systematic Review of the Clinical Literature. Oncologist
Lierman E et al (2012) Ruxolitinib inhibits transforming JAK2 fusion proteins in vitro and induces complete cytogenetic remission in t(8;9)(p22;p24)/PCM1-JAK2-positive chronic eosinophilic leukemia. Blood 120(7):1529–1531
Rumi E et al (2015) Efficacy of ruxolitinib in myeloid neoplasms with PCM1-JAK2 fusion gene. Ann Hematol 94(11):1927–1928
Schwaab J et al (2015) Limited duration of complete remission on ruxolitinib in myeloid neoplasms with PCM1-JAK2 and BCR-JAK2 fusion genes. Ann Hematol 94(2):233–238
Poitras JL et al (2008) Novel SSBP2-JAK2 fusion gene resulting from a t(5;9)(q14.1;p24.1) in pre-B acute lymphocytic leukemia. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 47(10):884–9
Tran TH et al (2018) Prognostic impact of kinase-activating fusions and IKZF1 deletions in pediatric high-risk B-lineage acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Blood Adv 2(5):529–533
Baer C et al (2018) Molecular genetic characterization of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms associated with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, FGFR1 or PCM1-JAK2. Haematologica 103(8):e348–e350
Rapanotti MC et al (2010) Molecular characterization of paediatric idiopathic hypereosinophilia. Br J Haematol 151(5):440–446
Gao L et al (2022) A rare cause of persistent leukocytosis with massive splenomegaly: Myeloid neoplasm with BCR-PDGFRA rearrangement-Case report and literature review. Medicine (Baltimore) 101(24):e29179
Elling C et al (2011) Novel imatinib-sensitive PDGFRA-activating point mutations in hypereosinophilic syndrome induce growth factor independence and leukemia-like disease. Blood 117(10):2935–2943
Qu SQ et al (2016) Long-term outcomes of imatinib in patients with FIP1L1/ PDGFRA associated chronic eosinophilic leukemia: experience of a single center in China. Oncotarget 7(22):33229–33236
Lierman E et al (2009) FIP1L1-PDGFRalpha D842V, a novel panresistant mutant, emerging after treatment of FIP1L1-PDGFRalpha T674I eosinophilic leukemia with single agent sorafenib. Leukemia 23(5):845–851
Sadovnik I et al (2014) Identification of Ponatinib as a potent inhibitor of growth migration, and activation of neoplastic eosinophils carrying FIP1L1-PDGFRA. Exp Hematol 42(4):282-293 e4
Fang H et al (2020) Systematic Use of Fluorescence in situ Hybridization (FISH) and Clinicopathological Features in the Screening of PDGFRB Rearrangements of Patients with Myeloid/Lymphoid Neoplasms. Histopathology
Gupta SK et al (2020) A Cryptic BCR-PDGFRB Fusion Resulting in a Chronic Myeloid Neoplasm With Monocytosis and Eosinophilia: A Novel Finding With Treatment Implications. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 18(10):1300–1304
Jan M et al (2020) A cryptic imatinib-sensitive G3BP1-PDGFRB rearrangement in a myeloid neoplasm with eosinophilia. Blood Adv 4(3):445–448
Strati P et al (2018) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with FGFR1 rearrangement. Leuk Lymphoma 59(7):1672–1676
Umino K et al (2018) Clinical outcomes of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with fibroblast growth factor receptor-1 (FGFR1) rearrangement. Hematology 23(8):470–477
Vega F et al (2008) t(8;13)-positive bilineal lymphomas: report of 6 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 32(1):14–20
Montenegro-Garreaud X et al (2017) Myeloproliferative neoplasms with t(8;22)(p11.2;q11.2)/BCR-FGFR1:a meta-analysis of 20 cases shows cytogenetic progression with B-lymphoid blast phase. Hum Pathol 65:147–156
Chen M et al (2021) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with CEP110-FGFR1 fusion: An analysis of 16 cases show common features and poor prognosis. Hematology 26(1):153–159
Verstovsek S et al (2018) Treatment of the myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with FGFR1 rearrangement with FGFR1 inhibitor. Ann Oncol 29(8):1880–1882
Hernandez-Boluda JC et al (2022) Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm with FGFR1-rearrangement: a study of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of EBMT. Bone Marrow Transplant 57(3):416–422
Fang H et al (2020) Systematic use of fluorescence in-situ hybridisation and clinicopathological features in the screening of PDGFRB rearrangements of patients with myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms. Histopathology 76(7):1042–1054
Strati, P, et al. (2017) Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with FGFR1 rearrangement. Leuk Lymphoma. 1–5
Brown LE et al (2016) A 26-Year-Old Female with Systemic Mastocytosis with Associated Myeloid Neoplasm with Eosinophilia and Abnormalities of PDGFRB, t(4;5)(q21;q33). Case Rep Hematol 2016:4158567
Duckworth CB, Zhang L, Li S (2014) Systemic mastocytosis with associated myeloproliferative neoplasm with t(8;19)(p12;q13.1) and abnormality of FGFR1: report of a unique case. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 7(2):801–7
Pardanani A et al (2004) FIP1L1-PDGFRA fusion: prevalence and clinicopathologic correlates in 89 consecutive patients with moderate to severe eosinophilia. Blood 104(10):3038–3045
Roberts KG et al (2014) Targetable kinase-activating lesions in Ph-like acute lymphoblastic leukemia. N Engl J Med 371(11):1005–1015
Najfeld V et al (2007) Numerical gain and structural rearrangements of JAK2, identified by FISH, characterize both JAK2617V>F-positive and -negative patients with Ph-negative MPD, myelodysplasia, and B-lymphoid neoplasms. Exp Hematol 35(11):1668–1676
Roberts KG et al (2018) Genomic and outcome analyses of Ph-like ALL in NCI standard-risk patients: a report from the Children’s Oncology Group. Blood 132(8):815–824
Wang W et al (2016) Cytogenetic Evolution Associated With Disease Progression in Hematopoietic Neoplasms With t(8;22)(p11;q11)/BCR-FGFR1 Rearrangement. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 14(6):708–711
Valent P et al (2021) Eosinophils and eosinophil-associated disorders: immunological, clinical, and molecular complexity. Semin Immunopathol 43(3):423–438
Wang SA et al (2016) Targeted next-generation sequencing identifies a subset of idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome with features similar to chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified. Mod Pathol 29(8):854–864
Pardanani A et al (2016) Predictors of survival in WHO-defined hypereosinophilic syndrome and idiopathic hypereosinophilia and the role of next-generation sequencing. Leukemia 30(9):1924–1926
Lee JS et al (2017) Idiopathic hypereosinophilia is clonal disorder? Clonality identified by targeted sequencing. PLoS ONE 12(10):e0185602
Cross NCP et al (2019) Recurrent activating STAT5B N642H mutation in myeloid neoplasms with eosinophilia. Leukemia 33(2):415–425
Kelemen K et al (2021) Eosinophilia/Hypereosinophilia in the Setting of Reactive and Idiopathic Causes, Well-Defined Myeloid or Lymphoid Leukemias, or Germline Disorders. Am J Clin Pathol 155(2):179–210
Wang SA et al (2017) Bone marrow morphology is a strong discriminator between chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified and reactive idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome. Haematologica 102(8):1352–1360
Fang H et al (2018) A Test Utilization Approach to the Diagnostic Workup of Isolated Eosinophilia in Otherwise Morphologically Unremarkable Bone Marrow: A Single Institutional Experience. Am J Clin Pathol 150(5):421–431
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
AZ, RH, DA, AO, and SW participated in the discussion and formulation of the International Consensus Classification (ICC) on eosinophilic disorder. All authors participated in the writing, editing, and proofreading of the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
The review follows the ethical standards.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.
About this article
Cite this article
Tzankov, A., Reichard, K.K., Hasserjian, R.P. et al. Updates on eosinophilic disorders. Virchows Arch 482, 85–97 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-022-03402-8
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-022-03402-8