Back

Molecular landscape and risk stratification in acute myeloid leukemia - insights from the real-world REFORM-AML cohort

Kristensen, D. T.; Broendum, R. F.; Knudsen, M.; Grubach, L.; Marcher, C.; Preiss, B.; Bibi, M. L.; Hoegdall, E.; Poulsen, T.; Skov, V.; Oerskov, A. D.; Groenbaek, K.; Hansen, J. W.; Schoellkopf, C.; Cowland, J.; Andersen, M. K.; Severinsen, M. T.; Vejgaard, C.; Larsen, O. H.; Vang, S.; Boegsted, M.; Roug, A. S.

2026-08-31 hematology
10.64898/2026.08.27.26361552 medRxiv
Show abstract

Large genomically annotated acute myeloid leukaemia (AML) datasets exist, but population-based contemporary cohorts remain scarce. Here we report clinicopathological, genomic, and outcome data from Danish AML patients. 2,512 AML patients were identified between 2015-2022, of whom 33.8% had available NGS data (NGS+). In patients [≤]70 years, baseline characteristics and outcomes were comparable between NGS+ and NGS- groups. In patients >70 years, more NGS+ patients received intensive treatment, but survival was similar among intensively treated patients. The distribution of mutations varied significantly by age and sex, with older age and male sex exhibiting higher frequencies of adverse-risk gene mutations. In intensively treated NGS+ patients, ELN2017 stratified 5-year OS: 58.4% (favorable), 43.4% (intermediate), and 28.2% (adverse), with hazard ratios (HRs) of 0.63 (favorable) and 1.45 (adverse) relative to intermediate. ELN2022 yielded corresponding OS rates of 56.9%, 51.8%, and 29.7%, with HRs of 0.78 and 1.86. The two models had comparable predictive performance for OS in a time-dependent model. In conclusion, outcomes of intensively treated AML patients were comparable irrespective of NGS status, underscoring the representativeness of the REFORM-AML database for the Danish AML population. Age and male sex correlated with adverse-risk mutations, and both ELN2017 and ELN2022 robustly predicted survival.

Matching journals

The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

50% of probability mass above

"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.