Impact on RFS and OS of allo-HSCT in CR1 and FLT3-ITD AR. (A) RFS (left) and OS (right) with and without allo-HSCT in CR1 and stratified for FLT3-ITD AR. Among FLT3-ITD low-AR cases, the group in which transplant was carried out in CR1 had significantly more favorable RFS and OS than the group in which transplant was not carried out in CR1 (RFS at 3 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 92.9% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 12.8%, P < .001; OS at 4 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 66.7% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 20.4%, P < .001). Similarly, among FLT3-ITD high-AR cases, RFS and OS were significantly more favorable in the group with transplant in CR1 than in the group without transplant in CR1 (RFS at 3 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 85.6% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 4.1%, P < .001; OS at 4 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 59.3% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 9.2%, P < .001). (B) RFS (left) and OS (right) in patients positive for both FLT3-ITD and NPM1 mut, showing results with and without allo-HSCT in CR1 and stratified for FLT3-ITD AR. Among FLT3-ITD low-AR cases, RFS and OS were significantly more favorable in the group with transplant in CR1 than in the group without transplant in CR1 (RFS at 3 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 85.7% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 15.2%, P = .013; OS at 4 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 66.7% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 15.6%, P = .003). Among FLT3-ITD high-AR cases similarly, RFS and OS were significantly more favorable in the group with transplant in CR1 than in the group without transplant in CR1 (RFS at 3 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 66.7% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 0.0%, P = .036; OS at 4 years: allo-HSCT in CR1 [+] group 75.0% vs allo-HSCT in CR1 [−] group 9.9%, P = .030). The group without allo-HSCT in CR1 includes cases that did not receive allo-HSCT.