Diagnostic challenges in the work up of hypereosinophilia: pitfalls in bone marrow core biopsy interpretation

World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of non-hematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary or clonal) disorders with the potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia (HE) has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 109/L, and may be associated with tissue damage. After the exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on a combination of various tests. They include morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization, molecular testing and flow immunophenotyping to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2022 World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification endorse a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and tyrosine kinase gene fusions" (MLN-eo-TK), and the MPN subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia" (CEL). Lymphocyte-variant HE is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (e.g., <1.5 × 109/L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Pemigatinib was recently approved for patients with relapsed or refractory FGFR1-rearranged neoplasms. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant HE and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-α have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. Mepolizumab, an interleukin-5 (IL-5) antagonist monoclonal antibody, is approved by the U.S Food and Drug Administration for patients with idiopathic HES. Cytotoxic chemotherapy agents, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation have been used for aggressive forms of HES and CEL, with outcomes reported for limited numbers of patients. Targeted therapies such as the IL-5 receptor antibody benralizumab, IL-5 monoclonal antibody depemokimab, and various tyrosine kinase inhibitors for MLN-eo-TK, are under active investigation.

Clinical and Therapeutic Intervention of Hypereosinophilia in the Era of Molecular Diagnosis

Hypereosinophilia (HE) presents with an elevated peripheral eosinophilic count of >1.5 × 109/L and is composed of a broad spectrum of secondary non-hematologic disorders and a minority of primary hematologic processes with heterogenous clinical presentations, ranging from mild symptoms to potentially lethal outcome secondary to end-organ damage. Following the introduction of advanced molecular diagnostics (genomic studies, RNA sequencing, and targeted gene mutation profile, etc.) in the last 1-2 decades, there have been deep insights into the etiology and molecular mechanisms involved in the development of HE. The classification of HE has been updated and refined following to the discovery of clinically novel markers and targets in the 2022 WHO classification and ICOG-EO 2021 Working Conference on Eosinophil Disorder and Syndromes. However, the diagnosis and management of HE is challenging given its heterogeneity and variable clinical outcome. It is critical to have a diagnostic algorithm for accurate subclassification of HE and hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) (e.g., reactive, familial, idiopathic, myeloid/lymphoid neoplasm, organ restricted, or with unknown significance) and to follow established treatment guidelines for patients based on its clinical findings and risk stratification.

Acute Myeloid Leukaemia With Translocation (8;21) Masquerading as Peripheral Blood Eosinophilia Having Dysplastic Features: A Diagnostic Challenge

Eosinophilia with a modest number of blasts (<20%) in the peripheral blood and bone marrow smears raises suspicion for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and acute myeloid leukaemia (AML). Here, we present a case of AML in a 16-year-old boy who presented with high-grade fever, respiratory distress, and generalised weakness. Marked eosinophilia with dysplastic features and occasional blasts were found in the peripheral blood. In view of dysplastic eosinophils and occasional blasts in peripheral blood, a bone marrow examination was requested which revealed increased eosinophils and their progenitors with dysplasia and a modest number of blast cells (<20%). The bone marrow findings suggest MPNs, which were eventually identified as AML having translocation (8;21) with the aid of immunophenotyping and cytogenetic studies. Eosinophilia and its phenotypic anomalies are rarely found in peripheral blood smears of AML patients with translocation (8;21) which may have been related to the leukaemic process.

Superior Efficacy of Midostaurin Over Cladribine in Advanced Systemic Mastocytosis: A Registry-Based Analysis

PURPOSE

On the basis of data from the German Registry on Disorders of Eosinophils and Mast Cells, we compared the efficacy of midostaurin and cladribine in patients with advanced systemic mastocytosis (AdvSM).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with AdvSM (n = 139) were treated with midostaurin only (n = 63, 45%), cladribine only (n = 23, 17%), or sequentially (midostaurin-cladribine, n = 30, 57%; cladribine-midostaurin, n = 23, 43%). Prognosis was assessed through the Mutation-Adjusted Risk Score (MARS). Besides the comparison of efficacy between midostaurin and cladribine on response (eg, organ dysfunction, bone marrow mast cell [MC] infiltration, and tryptase), overall survival (OS), and leukemia-free survival, we focused on the impact of treatment on involved non-MC lineages, for example, monocytes or eosinophils, and the KIT D816V expressed allele burden.

RESULTS

Midostaurin only was superior to cladribine only with effects from responses on MC and non-MC lineages conferring on a significantly improved OS (median 4.2 v 1.9 years, P = .033) and leukemia-free survival (2.7 v 1.3 years, P = .044) on the basis of a propensity score-weighted analysis of parameters included in MARS. Midostaurin compensated the inferior efficacy of cladribine in first- and second-line treatment. On midostaurin in any line, response of eosinophilia did not improve its baseline adverse prognostic impact, whereas response of monocytosis proved to be a positive on-treatment parameter. Multivariable analysis allowed to establish three risk categories (low/intermediate/high) through the combination of MARS and the reduction of the KIT D816V expressed allele burden of ≥ 25% at month 6 (median OS not reached v 3.0 years v 1.0 year; P < .001).

CONCLUSION

In this registry-based analysis, midostaurin revealed superior efficacy over cladribine in patients with AdvSM. In midostaurin-treated patients, the combination of baseline MARS and molecular response provided a compelling three-tier risk categorization (MARSv2.0) for OS.

World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2022 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of nonhematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary or clonal) disorders with potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia (HE) has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 10⁹ /L. After exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ hybridization, next generation sequencing gene assays, and flow immunophenotyping to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2016 World Health Organization endorses a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2", and the myeloproliferative neoplasm subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified" (CEL, NOS). Lymphocyte-variant HE is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (eg, < 1.5 × 10⁹ /L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant HE and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-α have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. Mepolizumab, an interleukin-5 (IL-5) antagonist monoclonal antibody, was recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for patients with idiopathic HES. The use of the IL-5 receptor antibody benralizumab, as well as other targeted therapies such as JAK2 and FGFR1 inhibitors, is under active investigation.

Myeloid/Lymphoid Neoplasms Associated With Eosinophilia and Rearrangements of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or With PCM1-JAK2

OBJECTIVES

To summarize cases submitted to the 2019 Society for Hematopathology/European Association for Haematopathology Workshop under the category of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2 rearrangements, focusing on recent updates and relevant practice findings.

METHODS

The cases were summarized according to their respective gene rearrangement to illustrate the spectrum of clinical, laboratory, and histopathology manifestations and to explore the appropriate molecular genetic tests.

RESULTS

Disease presentations were heterogeneous, including myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), myelodysplastic syndromes (MDSs), MDS/MPN, acute myeloid leukemia, acute B- or T-lymphoblastic lymphoma/acute lymphoblastic lymphoma (ALL/LBL), or mixed-lineage neoplasms. Frequent extramedullary involvement occurred. Eosinophilia was common but not invariably present. With the advancement of RNA sequencing, cryptic rearrangements were recognized in genes other than PDGFRA. Additional somatic mutations were more frequent in the FGFR1-rearranged cases. Cases with B-ALL presentations differed from Philadelphia-like B-ALL by the presence of an underlying MPN. Cases with FLT3 and ABL1 rearrangements could be potential candidates for future inclusion in this category.

CONCLUSIONS

Accurate diagnosis and classification of this category of myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms has important therapeutic implications. With the large number of submitted cases, we expand our understanding of these rare neoplasms and improve our ability to diagnose these genetically defined disorders.

Molecular Pathogenesis and Treatment Perspectives for Hypereosinophilia and Hypereosinophilic Syndromes

Hypereosinophilia (HE) is a heterogeneous condition with a persistent elevated eosinophil count of >350/mm³, which is reported in various (inflammatory, allergic, infectious, or neoplastic) diseases with distinct pathophysiological pathways. HE may be associated with tissue or organ damage and, in this case, the disorder is classified as hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). Different studies have allowed for the discovery of two major pathogenetic variants known as myeloid or lymphocytic HES. With the advent of molecular genetic analyses, such as T-cell receptor gene rearrangement assays and Next Generation Sequencing, it is possible to better characterize these syndromes and establish which patients will benefit from pharmacological targeted therapy. In this review, we highlight the molecular alterations that are involved in the pathogenesis of eosinophil disorders and revise possible therapeutic approaches, either implemented in clinical practice or currently under investigation in clinical trials.

Paratrabecular myelofibrosis and occult mastocytosis are strong morphological clues to suspect FIP1L1-PDGFRA translocation in hypereosinophilia

To study the clinico-haematological and histopathological characteristics of FIP1L1-PDGFRA rearranged hypereosinophilia/hypereosinophilic syndrome (F/P+ve HE/HES), a retrospective analysis of patients with F/P+ve HE diagnosed over a period of 43 months was performed. Peripheral blood smears, bone marrow aspirate (BMA) and biopsies (BMB) were reviewed in each case and; reticulin stain and immunohistochemistry for mast cell tryptase (MCT) and CD117 was performed. F/P+ve HE was diagnosed in a total of ten patients during study period. All patients were males with a median age of 36 years (23-44 years). The median duration of presenting complaints was 7 months (2 months-3 years) which included specific symptoms related to various organs (80% of cases). Anaemia, thrombocytopenia and splenomegaly were seen in 60%, 50% and 90% of the cases respectively. Mastocytosis was not obvious in BMA but identified by MCT on BMB in all cases. Myelofibrosis (grade ≥ 1) was seen in 80% of the cases and includes multifocal paratrabecular fibrosis in 50% of the biopsies. Our study shows that bone marrow mastocytosis and myelofibrosis are very useful morphological indicators to suspect F/P+ve HE and suggests the routine use of reticulin staining and MCT immunohistochemistry in all BMBs performed for the evaluation of HE/HES.

Hypereosinophilic syndromes in the precision medicine era: clinical, molecular aspects and therapeutic approaches (targeted therapies)

Introduction: Hypereosinophilic syndromes are a heterogeneous group of disorders that may be associated with life-threatening organ injury as a result of tissues infiltration by eosinophils. The main goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. When possible, therapy should be directed at the underlying etiology. However, even in the absence of any known cause, when organ damage is present, hypereosinophilia must be treated promptly and aggressively to reduce potential morbidity and mortality.Areas covered: Conventional therapies, including corticosteroids, hydroxyurea (hydroxycarbamide) and interferon-alpha, have shown variable efficacy and a non-negligible toxicity emphasizing the need of new therapeutic strategies based on drugs with different mechanisms of action.Expert opinion: Tyrosine kinase inhibitors have a central role among targeted therapies of hypereosinophilic syndromes. Imatinib, initially empirically used based on its activity in chronic myeloid leukemia, achieved preliminary excellent results further confirmed in large series of patients. Third-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as ponatinib, while active in vitro and in vivo in animals, still deserve confirmation in properly designed clinical trials. In addition, clinical investigation on monoclonal antibodies against interleukin-5, interleukin-5Rα, IgE, and CD52 represents a promising area of research.

World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2019 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of non-hematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary, clonal) disorders with potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1.5 × 10⁹ /L, and may be associated with tissue damage. After exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on a combination of various tests. They include morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescence in situ-hybridization, flow immunophenotyping, and T-cell clonality assessment to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic hematolymphoid neoplasm.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2016 World Health Organization endorses a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes. This includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2", and the MPN subtype, "chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified" (CEL, NOS). Lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (eg, <1.5 × 10⁹ /L) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close-follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-alfa have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and in steroid-refractory cases of HES. In addition to hydroxyurea, second line cytotoxic chemotherapy agents, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation have been used for aggressive forms of HES and CEL, with outcomes reported for limited numbers of patients. The use of antibodies against interleukin-5 (IL-5) (mepolizumab), the IL-5 receptor (benralizumab), as well as other targets on eosinophils remains an active area of investigation.

Eosinophilic disorders: evaluation of current classification and diagnostic criteria, proposal of a practical diagnostic algorithm

Eosinophilic disorders represent a group of pathologic conditions with highly heterogeneous pathophysiology and clinical presentation and variable prognosis, ranging from asymptomatic or mild, to severe and complex cases, with fatal outcome. Interest in this group of disorders has increased during the last two decades, with consistent progress made regarding understanding of molecular mechanisms, refining of diagnostic criteria, classification and evaluation of therapeutic options. There are still many gaps and difficulties in evaluating eosinophilic syndromes and diseases in medical practice. The disease prognosis depends mainly on the cause and mechanism of eosinophilia, on severity of organ dysfunction and on accurate diagnosis and response to treatment. Besides primary hypereosinophilic syndromes and secondary (reactive) eosinophilias, many associated or idiopathic forms have been described, making this topic a complex and difficult medical entity. An important aim of the experts in the field is to agree upon a more clear and practically useful classification, a better characterization of various phenotypes and endotypes of eosinophilic diseases and to identify novel biomarkers and more effective therapies. The aim of this paper is to review recent data from the literature regarding definition, classification and diagnosis criteria of eosinophilic diseases and to propose a revised and updated diagnostic algorithm useful in clinical practice.

Eosinophilia in acute myeloid leukemia: Overlooked and underexamined

The presence of eosinophilia in acute myeloid leukemia (AML) suggests an underlying core binding factor (CBF) lesion, a platelet derived growth factor (PDGFR) translocation, or another rare translocation (such as ETV6-ABL1). Each of these cytogenetic entities carries unique diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications. CBF AML is most common and as such, its treatment is more clearly established, consisting of intensive induction chemotherapy followed by cytarabine based consolidation. Due in large part to its intrinsic chemo-sensitivity, CBF AML is associated with relatively high rates of remission and survival. PDGFR mediated AML is comparatively rare, and as such, diagnostic and treatment paradigms are not as well defined. Early identification of PDGFR translocations is essential, as they confer profound imatinib sensitivity which may, in many instances, spare the need for chemotherapy. Prompt recognition of such lesions requires a strong index of suspicion, and as such these diagnoses are often initially overlooked. Unfortunately, many cases of PDGFR associated AML, particularly those with other concurrent cytogenetic abnormalities, demonstrate treatment emergent imatinib resistance. Such patients continue to present a challenge, even with the advent of novel tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Patients with rare translocations such as ETV6-ABL1 are not well described however seem to follow an aggressive clinical course, with limited response to imatinib, and poor outcomes. This review examines the significance of eosinophilia in the context of AML, with respect to its presentation, pathology, and cytogenetics, and with special attention to appropriate evaluation and treatment.

The Spectrum of Hypereosinophilia and Associated Clonal Disorders - A Real-World Data Based on Combined Retrospective and Prospective Analysis from a Tropical Setting

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency, etiological spectrum and treatment outcome of hypereosinophilia (HE) and hypereosinophilic syndromes (HES) in a tropical setting.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis of hospital data of five years (January 2009 to December 2013) and a comprehensive prospective evaluation of patients presenting with HE/HES over a period of 33 months (January 2014 to September 2016) was performed.

RESULTS

HE/HES was diagnosed in a total of 125 patients during the study period with an estimated prevalence of 0.5-1 case per 100,000 population in our hospital settings. 41 patients were excluded from the final analysis due to lack of sufficient data. Infections, especially helminths were the commonest cause (34%) followed by primary/clonal HE/HES (24%) and reactive HE/HES secondary to various clonal disorders (14.3%). A lymphocytic variant of HES and FIP1L1-PDGFRA positive HES were diagnosed in 3.6% each. Imatinib-responsive BCR-ABL1 negative HE/HES constitute 7.1% in our patients. None of the clinical or routine laboratory features including the age of patients, duration of HE, presence or absence of organomegaly, hemoglobin levels, eosinophil %, absolute eosinophil count, total leukocyte count, platelet counts, serum IgE levels or presence of myelofibrosis could predict or exclude malignancy in patients with HE/HES. The absence of blasts in peripheral blood or the absence of >5% blasts in bone marrow does not exclude primary/clonal HES.

CONCLUSIONS

An underlying malignancy (Primary HE/HES and neoplasms leading to reactive HES; 35.7%) is diagnosed with nearly equal frequency compared to infections (34.5%) in tropical settings. There are no hematological or serological parameters, which can reliably be used to exclude an underlying malignancy, necessitating a thorough follow-up and comprehensive work-up in patients with HE/HES.

Defective WNT signaling associates with bone marrow fibrosis-a cross-sectional cohort study in a family with WNT1 osteoporosis

This study explores bone marrow function in patients with defective WNT1 signaling. Bone marrow samples showed increased reticulin and altered granulopoiesis while overall hematopoiesis was normal. Findings did not associate with severity of osteoporosis. These observations provide new insight into the role of WNT signaling in bone marrow homeostasis.

INTRODUCTION

WNT signaling regulates bone homeostasis and survival and self-renewal of hematopoietic stem cells. Aberrant activation may lead to osteoporosis and bone marrow pathology. We aimed to explore bone marrow findings in a large family with early-onset osteoporosis due to a heterozygous WNT1 mutation.

METHODS

We analyzed peripheral blood samples, and bone marrow aspirates and biopsies from 10 subjects with WNT1 mutation p.C218G. One subject was previously diagnosed with idiopathic myelofibrosis and others had no previously diagnosed hematologic disorders. The findings were correlated with the skeletal phenotype, as evaluated by number of peripheral and spinal fractures and bone mineral density.

RESULTS

Peripheral blood samples showed no abnormalities in cell counts, morphology or distributions but mild increase in platelet count. Bone marrow aspirates (from 8/10 subjects) showed mild decrease in bone marrow iron storages in 6 and variation in cell distributions in 5 subjects. Bone marrow biopsies (from 6/10 subjects) showed increased bone marrow reticulin (grade MF-2 in the myelofibrosis subject and grade MF-1 in 4 others), and an increase in overall, and a shift towards early-phase, granulopoiesis. The bone marrow findings did not associate with the severity of skeletal phenotype.

CONCLUSIONS

Defective WNT signaling associates with a mild increase in bone marrow reticulin and may predispose to myelofibrosis, while overall hematopoiesis and peripheral blood values are unaltered in individuals with a WNT1 mutation. In this family with WNT1 osteoporosis, bone marrow findings were not related to the severity of osteoporosis.

World Health Organization-defined eosinophilic disorders: 2017 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management

DISEASE OVERVIEW

The eosinophilias encompass a broad range of nonhematologic (secondary or reactive) and hematologic (primary, clonal) disorders with potential for end-organ damage.

DIAGNOSIS

Hypereosinophilia has generally been defined as a peripheral blood eosinophil count greater than 1500/mm³ and may be associated with tissue damage. After exclusion of secondary causes of eosinophilia, diagnostic evaluation of primary eosinophilias relies on a combination of morphologic review of the blood and marrow, standard cytogenetics, fluorescent in situ-hybridization, flow immunocytometry, and T-cell clonality assessment to detect histopathologic or clonal evidence for an acute or chronic myeloid or lymphoproliferative disorder.

RISK STRATIFICATION

Disease prognosis relies on identifying the subtype of eosinophilia. After evaluation of secondary causes of eosinophilia, the 2016 World Health Organization endorses a semi-molecular classification scheme of disease subtypes which includes the major category "myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1 or with PCM1-JAK2," and the "MPN subtype, chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified" (CEL, NOS). Lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia is an aberrant T-cell clone-driven reactive eosinophila, and idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES) is a diagnosis of exclusion.

RISK-ADAPTED THERAPY

The goal of therapy is to mitigate eosinophil-mediated organ damage. For patients with milder forms of eosinophilia (e.g., < 1500/mm³ ) without symptoms or signs of organ involvement, a watch and wait approach with close-follow-up may be undertaken. Identification of rearranged PDGFRA or PDGFRB is critical because of the exquisite responsiveness of these diseases to imatinib. Corticosteroids are first-line therapy for patients with lymphocyte-variant hypereosinophilia and HES. Hydroxyurea and interferon-alpha have demonstrated efficacy as initial treatment and steroid-refractory cases of HES. In addition to hydroxyurea, second line cytotoxic chemotherapy agents and hematopoietic cell transplant have been used for aggressive forms of HES and CEL with outcomes reported for limited numbers of patients. The use of antibodies against interleukin-5 (IL-5) (mepolizumab), the IL-5 receptor (benralizumab), and CD52 (alemtuzumab), as well as other targets on eosinophils remains an active area of investigation.

Bone marrow morphology is a strong discriminator between chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified and reactive idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome

Chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified can be difficult to distinguish from idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome according to the current World Health Organization guideline. To examine whether the morphological features of bone marrow might aid in the differential diagnosis of these two entities, we studied a total of 139 patients with a diagnosis of chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified (n=17) or idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome (n=122). As a group, abnormal bone marrow morphological features, resembling myelodysplastic syndromes, myeloproliferative neoplasm or myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm, were identified in 40/139 (27%) patients: 16 (94%) of those with chronic eosinophilic leukemia and 24 (20%) of those with hypereosinophilic syndrome. Abnormal bone marrow correlated with older age (P<0.001), constitutional symptoms (P<0.001), anemia (P=0.041), abnormal platelet count (P=0.002), organomegaly (P=0.008), elevated lactate dehydrogenase concentration (P=0.005), abnormal karyotype (P<0.001), as well as the presence of myeloid neoplasm-related mutations (P<0.001). Patients with abnormal bone marrow had shorter survival (48.1 months versus not reached, P<0.001), a finding which was independent of other confounding factors (P<0.001). The association between abnormal bone marrow and shorter survival was also observed in hypereosinophilic syndrome patients alone. In summary, most patients with chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified and a proportion of those with idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome show abnormal bone marrow features similar to the ones encountered in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes, myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm or BCR-ABL1-negative myeloproliferative neoplasm. Among patients who are currently considered to have idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome, abnormal bone marrow is a strong indicator of clonal hematopoiesis. Similar to other myeloid neoplasms, bone marrow morphology should be one of the major criteria to distinguish patients with chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified or clonal hypereosinophilic syndrome from those with truly reactive idiopathic hypereosinophilic syndrome.

Myeloid neoplasms with eosinophilia

Molecular diagnostics has generated substantial dividends in dissecting the genetic basis of myeloid neoplasms with eosinophilia. The family of diseases generated by dysregulated fusion tyrosine kinase (TK) genes is recognized by the World Health Organization (WHO) category, “Myeloid/lymphoid neoplasms with eosinophilia and rearrangement of PDGFRA, PDGFRB, or FGFR1, or with PCM1-JAK2.” In addition to myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), these patients can present with myelodysplastic syndrome/MPN, as well as de novo or secondary mixed-phenotype leukemias or lymphomas. Eosinophilia is a common, but not invariable, feature of these diseases. The natural history of PDGFRA- and PDGFRB-rearranged neoplasms has been dramatically altered by imatinib. In contrast, patients with FGFR1 and JAK2 fusion TK genes exhibit a more aggressive course and variable sensitivity to current TK inhibitors, and in most cases, long-term disease-free survival may only be achievable with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Similar poor prognosis outcomes may be observed with rearrangements of FLT3 or ABL1 (eg, both of which commonly partner with ETV6), and further investigation is needed to validate their inclusion in the current WHO-defined group of eosinophilia-associated TK fusion-driven neoplasms. The diagnosis chronic eosinophilic leukemia, not otherwise specified (CEL, NOS) is assigned to patients with MPN with eosinophilia and nonspecific cytogenetic/molecular abnormalities and/or increased myeloblasts. Myeloid mutation panels have identified somatic variants in patients with a provisional diagnosis of hypereosinophilia of undetermined significance, reclassifying some of these cases as eosinophilia-associated neoplasms. Looking forward, one of the many challenges will be how to use the results of molecular profiling to guide prognosis and selection of actionable therapeutic targets.