Background. Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are characterized by aberrant DNA methylation, and mutations in epigenetic modifiers are frequently found in these patients. Although DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTi) are used to treat MDS, response variability remains a challenge in the clinic, with limited predictive markers. Methods. We integrated genomic, epigenomic, and transcriptomic analyses of 98 MDS patients. Patients were classified into epigenetic subtypes via hierarchical clustering. Random forest classifiers were developed and validated using internal stratified testing and an independent external cohort to predict AZA response. Results. MDS is characterized by widespread DNA hypomethylation affecting distal regulatory elements. We identified seven epigenetic clusters correlated with distinct molecular drivers. Notably, Cluster VI exhibited low mutational burden but a high AZA response rate of 71% (P ≤ 0.01). While transcriptional profiles alone failed to distinguish responders, a DNAme-based classifier achieved an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.82. An integrative model combining DNAme, gene expression, mutations, and clinical parameters achieved an AUC of 0.93 in internal validation and 0.88 in the external cohort. Conclusion. Epigenetic signatures at distal genomic elements provide superior predictive power for AZA response compared to promoter-centric or transcriptional analyses. These findings establish a robust framework for personalized treatment strategies in MDS.
Qin Yang, Miguel Torres-Martin, Masataka Taguchi, Alice Brogi, Irene Casalin, Eleonora Ceneri, Stephanie Halene, Amy E. DeZern, Elizabeth A. Griffiths, Matilde Y. Follo, Carlo Finelli, Jerald P. Radich, Michael J. Rauh, Rafael Bejar, Mikkael A. Sekeres, Valeria Santini, Maria E. Figueroa
Usage data is cumulative from September 2026 through October 2026.
| Usage | JCI | PMC |
|---|---|---|
| Text version | 463 | 0 |
| 236 | 0 | |
| Supplemental data | 123 | 0 |
| Citation downloads | 138 | 0 |
| Totals | 960 | 0 |
| Total Views | 960 | |
Usage information is collected from two different sources: this site (JCI) and Pubmed Central (PMC). JCI information (compiled daily) shows human readership based on methods we employ to screen out robotic usage. PMC information (aggregated monthly) is also similarly screened of robotic usage.
Various methods are used to distinguish robotic usage. For example, Google automatically scans articles to add to its search index and identifies itself as robotic; other services might not clearly identify themselves as robotic, or they are new or unknown as robotic. Because this activity can be misinterpreted as human readership, data may be re-processed periodically to reflect an improved understanding of robotic activity. Because of these factors, readers should consider usage information illustrative but subject to change.