The International Consensus Classification of myelodysplastic syndromes and related entities

Orazi, Attilio; Órfão, Alberto; Rozman, Marı́a; Wang, Sa A.

doi:10.1007/s00428-022-03417-1

Cited by 22 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 85 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3 In a recent December issue of Virchow Archives, several articles expand on the initial ICC publication with extensive comments by authors from their committee. [6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] Many authors were present in the clinical advisory committee (CAC), contributing to the 2016 revision of the 4th WHO classification. In both the new papers, the introduction declared that they aimed to propose a revision of the 2016 WHO classification based on scientific evidence.…”

Section: What Do We Continue To Do Today: In July 2022 the Proposed 5thmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In September 2022, the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of Myeloid Neoplasms and Acute Leukemia also appeared in Blood 3 . In a recent December issue of Virchow Archives, several articles expand on the initial ICC publication with extensive comments by authors from their committee 6–19 . Many authors were present in the clinical advisory committee (CAC), contributing to the 2016 revision of the 4th WHO classification.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

ICC‐2022 versus WHO‐2022 classification systems for acute leukemias and myeloid neoplasms: The perspective from two classical morphologists

Zini

Bennett

2023

American J Hematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: What Do We Continue To Do Today: In July 2022 the Proposed 5thmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

ICC‐2022 versus WHO‐2022 classification systems for acute leukemias and myeloid neoplasms: The perspective from two classical morphologists

Zini

Bennett

2023

American J Hematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many updates on the subclassification and diagnostic criteria of MDS are introduced in WHO-5 and ICC (Supplementary Table 1, http://links.lww.com/COH/A27) [1 ▪▪ ,3 ▪▪ ,23 ▪ ], including more emphasis on cytogenetic and molecular abnormalities for MDS classification and addition of myeloid precursor lesions, which are related to clonal hematopoiesis [24,25].…”

Section: Myeloid Precursor Lesions and Myelodysplastic Syndromesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…ICC additionally incorporates VEXAS syndrome (Table 1). CHIP is defined as the presence of a somatic mutation in a myeloid neoplasm driver gene (VAF ≥2%) or a non-MDS-defining clonal cytogenetic aberration without unexplained cytopenia or filling the criteria for any specific myeloid neoplasm [1 ▪▪ ,3 ▪▪ ,23 ▪ ]. In CCUS, the cytopenia is persistent (≥4 months), idiopathic, and not caused by another comorbid condition.…”

Section: Myeloid Precursor Lesions and Myelodysplastic Syndromesmentioning

confidence: 99%

The fifth edition of the World Health Organization Classification and the International Consensus Classification of myeloid neoplasms: evolving guidelines in the molecular era with practical implications

Zheng

Zhang

Pan

2022

Current Opinion in Hematology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of reviewThere have been major advances in our understanding of molecular pathogenesis of myeloid neoplasms, which prompt the updates in the classification of myeloid neoplasms in the fifth edition of World Health Organization Classification (WHO-5) and the new International Consensus Classification (ICC). The purpose of this review is to provide an overview of these two classification systems for myeloid neoplasms.Recent findingsThe definition, classification, and diagnostic criteria in many myeloid entities have been refined in WHO-5 and ICC with improved understanding of morphology and integration of new genetic findings. Particularly, molecular and cytogenetic studies have been increasingly incorporated into the classification, risk stratification, and selection of therapy of myeloid neoplasms. Overall, despite some revisions and discrepancies between WHO-5 and ICC, the major categories of myeloid neoplasms remain the same. Further validation studies are warranted to fine-tune and, ideally, integrate these two classifications.SummaryIntegration of clinical information, laboratory parameters, morphologic features, and cytogenetic and molecular studies is essential for the classification of myeloid neoplasms, as recommended by both WHO-5 and ICC.

show abstract

“…In contrast, the ICC classification is published in its final form in the Arber et al article 4 . In addition, several ICC participants have published review articles, with more in the works, which further detail the classification and its applicability to routine clinical practice 9–11 . As with prior changes in classification, anyone using the ICC classification (or ultimately a final version of the WHO fifth edition) should indicate in their diagnosis which classification is being used and whenever possible, translate their diagnosis into the still largely used revised fourth edition WHO classification, to reduce the confusion inherent in changes in disease classification.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Moving toward more molecular classifications of myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia

Arber

Orazi

2022

American J Hematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The increase in our understanding of the genetic complexity of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and acute myeloid leukemia (AML), as well at the rapid introduction of more targeted therapies for these diseases has made the diagnosis and classification of AML and MDS more challenging and nuanced. The third, fourth, and revised fourth edition World Health Organization (WHO) classifications, published by the International Agency on Cancer (IARC), have succeeded in incorporating new genetic criteria in the various disease classification schemes by carefully handling the overwhelming amount of data and complexity of these disorders. Updating an existing classification system requires not only integrating the most recent published literature, but also developing a consensus by overcoming differences of opinion on how to incorporate the new data. The updating process was developed by the Society for Hematopathology and the European Association for Hematopathology through a Clinical Advisory Committee (CAC). The CAC met prior to each classification being developed, to come to a consensus on what to change and how to incorporate those changes into comprehensive diagnostic criteria. IARC also provided input and published the classification within their Blue Book series.

show abstract

The International Consensus Classification of myelodysplastic syndromes and related entities

Cited by 22 publications

References 85 publications

ICC‐2022 versus WHO‐2022 classification systems for acute leukemias and myeloid neoplasms: The perspective from two classical morphologists

ICC‐2022 versus WHO‐2022 classification systems for acute leukemias and myeloid neoplasms: The perspective from two classical morphologists

The fifth edition of the World Health Organization Classification and the International Consensus Classification of myeloid neoplasms: evolving guidelines in the molecular era with practical implications

Moving toward more molecular classifications of myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About