Eosinophilia and eosinophil activation are recurrent features in various reactive states and certain hematologic malignancies. In patients with hypereosinophilia (HE), HE‐induced organ damage is often encountered and may lead to the diagnosis of a hypereosinophilic syndrome (HES). A number of known mechanisms and etiologies contribute to the development of HE and HES. Based on these etiologies and the origin of eosinophils, HE and HES are divided into primary forms where eosinophils are clonal cells, reactive forms where an underlying reactive or neoplastic condition is detected and eosinophils are considered to be “non‐clonal” cells, and idiopathic HE and HES in which neither a clonal nor a reactive underlying pathology is detected. Since 2012, this classification and the related criteria have been widely accepted and regarded as standard. However, during the past few years, new developments in the field and an increasing number of markers and targets have created a need to update these criteria and the classification of HE and HES. To address this challenge, a Working Conference on eosinophil disorders was organized in 2021. In this conference, a panel of experts representing the relevant fields, including allergy, dermatology, hematology, immunology, laboratory medicine, and pathology, met and discussed new markers and concepts as well as refinements in definitions, criteria and classifications of HE and HES. The outcomes of this conference are presented in this article and should assist in the diagnosis and management of patients with HE and HES in daily practice and in the preparation and conduct of clinical trials.

We report on 18 patients with myeloid neoplasms and associated tyrosine kinase (TK) fusion genes on treatment with the TK inhibitors (TKI) ruxolitinib (PCM1‐JAK2, n = 8; BCR‐JAK2, n = 1) and imatinib, nilotinib or dasatinib (ETV6‐ABL1, n = 9). On ruxolitinib (median 24 months, range 2‐36 months), a complete hematologic response (CHR) and complete cytogenetic response (CCR) was achieved by five of nine and two of nine patients, respectively. However, ruxolitinib was stopped in eight of nine patients because of primary resistance (n = 3), progression (n = 3) or planned allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo SCT, n = 2). At a median of 36 months (range 4‐78 months) from diagnosis, five of nine patients are alive: four of six patients after allo SCT and one patient who remains on ruxolitinib. In ETV6‐ABL1 positive patients, a durable CHR was achieved by four of nine patients (imatinib with one of five, nilotinib with two of three, dasatinib with one of one). Because of inadequate efficacy (lack of hematological and/or cytogenetic/molecular response), six of nine patients (imatinib, n = 5; nilotinib, n = 1) were switched to nilotinib or dasatinib. At a median of 23 months (range 3‐60 months) from diagnosis, five of nine patients are in CCR or complete molecular response (nilotinib, n = 2; dasatinib, n = 2; allo SCT, n = 1) while two of nine patients have died. We conclude that (a) responses on ruxolitinib may only be transient in the majority of JAK2 fusion gene positive patients with allo SCT being an important early treatment option, and (b) nilotinib or dasatinib may be more effective than imatinib to induce durable complete remissions in ETV6‐ABL1 positive patients.

Mast cell leukemia (MCL) is a rare subtype of systemic mastocytosis defined by ≥20% mast cells (MC) on a bone marrow aspirate. We evaluated 92 patients with MCL from the European Competence Network on Mastocytosis registry. Thirty-one (34%) patients had a diagnosis of MCL with an associated hematologic neoplasm (MCL-AHN). Chronic MCL (lack of C-findings) comprised 14% of patients, and only 4.5% had “leukemic MCL” (≥10% circulating MCs). KIT D816V was found in 62/85 (73%) evaluable patients; 9 (11%) individuals exhibited alternative KIT mutations, and no KIT variants were detected in 14 (17%) subjects. Ten evaluable patients (17%) had an abnormal karyotype and the poor-risk SRSF2, ASXL1, and RUNX1 (S/A/R) mutations were identified in 16/36 (44%) patients who underwent next-generation sequencing. Midostaurin was the most common therapy administered to 65% of patients and 45% as first-line therapy. The median overall survival (OS) was 1.6 years. In multivariate analysis (S/A/R mutations excluded owing to low event rates), a diagnosis of MCL-AHN (hazard ratio [HR], 4.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7-13.0; P = .001) and abnormal karyotype (HR, 5.6; 95% CI, 1.4-13.3; P = .02) were associated with inferior OS; KIT D816V positivity (HR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.11-0.98; P = .04) and midostaurin treatment (HR, 0.32; 95% CI, 0.08-0.72; P = .008) were associated with superior OS. These data provide the most comprehensive snapshot of the clinicopathologic, molecular, and treatment landscape of MCL to date, and should help further inform subtyping and prognostication of MCL.

Mastocytosis is a rare and complex disease characterized by expansion of clonal mast cells (MC) in skin and/or various internal organ systems. Involvement of internal organs leads to the diagnosis of systemic mastocytosis (SM). The WHO classification divides SM into indolent SM, smoldering SM and advanced SM variants, including SM with an associated hematologic neoplasm, aggressive SM, and MC leukemia. Historically, genetic analysis of individuals with pure cutaneous mastocytosis (CM) and SM have focused primarily on cohort studies of inherited single nucleotide variants and acquired pathogenic variants. The most prevalent pathogenic variant (mutation) in patients with SM is KIT p.D816V, which is detectable in most adult patients. Other somatic mutations have also been identified—especially in advanced SM—in TET2, SRSF2, ASXL1, RUNX1, CBL and JAK2, and shown to impact clinical and cellular phenotypes. Although only small patient cohorts have been analyzed, disease associations have also been identified in several germline variants within genes encoding certain cytokines or their receptors (IL13, IL6, IL6R, IL31, IL4R) and toll-like receptors. More recently, an increased prevalence of hereditary alpha-tryptasemia (HαT) caused by increased TPSAB1 copy number encoding alpha-tryptase has been described in patients with SM. Whereas HαT is found in 3–6% of general Western populations, it is identified in up to 17% of patients with SM. In the current manuscript we review the prevalence, functional role and clinical impact of various germline and somatic genetic variants in patients with mastocytosis.

In systemic mastocytosis (SM), qualitative and serial quantitative assessment of the KIT D816V mutation is of diagnostic and prognostic relevance. We investigated peripheral blood and bone marrow samples of 161 patients (indolent SM (ISM), n = 40; advanced SM, AdvSM, n = 121) at referral and during follow-up for the KIT D816V variant allele frequency (VAF) at the DNA-level and the KIT D816V expressed allele burden (EAB) at the RNA-level. A round robin test with four participating laboratories revealed an excellent correlation (r > 0.99, R² > 0.98) between three different DNA-assays. VAF and EAB strongly correlated in ISM (r = 0.91, coefficient of determination, R² = 0.84) but only to a lesser extent in AdvSM (r = 0.71; R² = 0.5). However, as compared to an EAB/VAF ratio ≤2 (cohort A, 77/121 patients, 64%) receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis identified an EAB/VAF ratio of >2 (cohort B, 44/121 patients, 36%) as predictive for an advanced phenotype and a significantly inferior median survival (3.3 vs. 11.7 years; p = 0.005). In terms of overall survival, Cox-regression analysis was only significant for the EAB/VAF ratio >2 (p = 0.006) but not for VAF or EAB individually. This study demonstrates for the first time that the transcriptional activity of KIT D816V may play an important role in the pathophysiology of SM.