Mayo Alliance Prognostic System (MAPS) Score

Introduction

The Mayo Alliance Prognostic System was developed by Animesh Pardanani and colleagues, combining five clinical variables into a risk model, later enhanced by adding mutation data, to predict survival in systemic mastocytosis (SM). The model was built from a large cohort of SM patients seen at Mayo Clinic (n = 580). It comes in two versions:

• Clinical model — uses only readily available lab/clinical data (no genetic testing needed)

• Hybrid clinical-molecular model — adds mutation testing for extra precision

How it works

Each patient is scored by adding up points across these variables:

The clinical-only model maxes out at 5 points; adding mutation status brings the hybrid model to a max of 6.

How results are broken down

The score stratifies patients into risk groups tied to survival estimates. From the original derivation cohort, more risk factors present translated to progressively worse outcomes — going from a 5-year survival near 99% with zero risk factors down to single digits with all five factors present, and median survival dropping from "not reached" to under a year at the high end.

Results in this tool will display as follows:

The bottom line

Higher total score → worse expected prognosis.

The result should inform (not dictate) treatment intensity decisions — for instance, prompting consideration of more aggressive therapy at higher scores — always alongside full clinical judgment.

One more note: MAPS keeps evolving — a 2025 "MAPS-R" revision project is underway at Mayo Clinic to account for prognostic differences within the advanced-SM subcategories defined by the newer International Consensus Classification, and a separate 910-patient validation study compared MAPS's performance against other prognostic models using ICC-based classification. So if you're using this clinically, it's worth keeping an eye out for the updated version.