News|Articles|April 28, 2026

Study Challenges Prognostic Importance of Genomic Complexity in CLL

Fact checked by: Maggie L. Shaw
Listen
0:00 / 0:00

Key Takeaways

  • Genomic complexity was defined by CNA burden, with ≥3 alterations indicating complexity and ≥5 indicating high genomic complexity, reflecting karyotypic and copy-number disruption rather than single lesions.
  • High genomic complexity enriched for unmutated IGHV (81%), TP53 aberrations (36%), short telomere length (61%), del(13q), and del(11q), implying convergence of adverse molecular and cytogenetic features.
SHOW MORE

A consensus definition of high genomic complexity in chronic lymphocytic leukemia may be less important than analyzing the contributions of individual biomarkers.

The apparent links between genomic complexity (GC) and poor outcomes in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) may simply be a reflection of the convergence of high-risk features usually present in patients with high GC (HGC), according to a new study.

The report, published in Leukemia, casts doubt on whether HGC itself should be considered an independent prognostic biomarker.1

Recent research has suggested that HGC is a sign of a poor prognosis and a higher risk of Richter’s transformation in CLL, explained the authors.2 The classification of GC is based on chromosomal alterations. Cases are considered to have GC if they have 3 or more karyotypic or copy number alterations (CNAs); patients with 5 or more alterations are considered to have HGC.

“Notably, although TP53 aberrations precede the evolution of GC, over 20% of GC cases lack detectable TP53 lesions, indicating that other factors may contribute to GC and certain chromosomal changes like trisomy 12 and trisomy 19 may positively or neutrally impact clinical outcomes,” they authors wrote.

HGC is also associated with telomere length (TL) shortening, which has itself been linked with deletions of 17p and 11q, and a poor prognosis.3 Yet, the researchers said it remains unclear whether measuring GC itself is the most helpful means of assessing patient prognosis or whether the underlying causes of HGC are more important, leading to the question: does GC itself lead to worse outcomes or is GC simply a byproduct of other high-risk features?

To find out, the investigators decided to analyze the number of CNAs in 495 untreated patients with CLL who participated in 3 (immuno)chemotherapy trials. The authors also looked at immunoglobulin heavy chain variable (IGHV) status, TL, targeted sequencing, and DNA-methylation subtypes.

Most of the participants in the trial (n = 334) were considered to have low GC (LGC), meaning they had 2 or fewer CNAs. Another 97 patients had 3 or 4 CNAs, categorized as intermediate GC (IGC). The remaining 64 participants were considered to have HGC.

HGC was associated with unmutated IGHV genes (81%; P <.001), TP53 aberrations (36%; P <.001), short TL (61%; P <.05), deletion of 13q (50%; P <.001), and deletion of 11q (22%; P <005). Meanwhile, the authors said, patients with IGC were more likely to have biallelic ATM disruption and BIRC3 deletions (P < .001), and patients with LGC were more likely to have trisomy 12 and NOTCH1 mutations (P < .001).

The authors performed univariate and multivariate modeling to try and discern the exact cause of the apparent links between HGC and poor outcomes. They found that although HGC was associated with inferior progression-free survival and overall survival in some of the study cohorts, its prognostic value was inconsistent in multivariate models that included TP53 abnormalities, TL, naive CLL, and IGHV status.

“Features such as TP53 aberration, unmutated IGHV, short telomere length and methylation subtype are strongly associated with HGC and independently predict outcome, suggesting that these biomarkers, individually or in combination, may more precisely define this patient subgroup,” the authors explained.

The investigators said their findings support the idea that these individual features may more precisely identify high-risk patients compared with GCalone.

They noted that their report is based on trials that assessed traditional (immuno)chemotherapy, and thus their findings may be less applicable in an era of targeted therapies. They also said a broader gene panel might shed additional light on GC.

They said future research should look at the interplay between telomere attrition, IGHV status, and DNA methylation subtypes to help optimize risk stratification and personalized patient management.

References

  1. Parker H, Carr L, Norris K, et al. High-risk molecular features may eclipse genomic complexity in predicting chronic lymphocytic leukemia outcomes; UK clinical trial insights. Leukemia. 2026;40(4):816-826. doi:10.1038/s41375-026-02906-5
  2. Visentin A, Bonaldi L, Rigolin GM, et al. The complex karyotype landscape in chronic lymphocytic leukemia allows the refinement of the risk of Richter syndrome transformation. Haematologica. 2022;107(4):868-876. doi:10.3324/haematol.2021.278304
  3. Jebaraj BMC, Tausch E, Landau DA, et al. Short telomeres are associated with inferior outcome, genomic complexity, and clonal evolution in chronic lymphocytic leukemia. Leukemia. 2019;33(9):2183-2194. doi:10.1038/s41375-019-0446-4