Search

Ruxolitinib (RUX) is extensively used in myelofibrosis (MF). Despite its early efficacy, most patients lose response over time and, after discontinuation, have a worse overall survival (OS). Currently, response criteria able to predict OS in RUX-treated patients are lacking, leading to uncertainty regarding the switch to second-line treatments. In this study, we investigated predictors of survival collected after 6 months of RUX in 209 MF patients participating in the real-world ambispective observational RUXOREL-MF study (NCT03959371). Multivariable analysis identified the following risk factors: (1) RUX dose <20 mg twice daily at baseline, months 3 and 6 (hazard ratio [HR], 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-3.00; P = .03), (2) palpable spleen length reduction from baseline ≤30% at months 3 and 6 (HR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.40-3.65; P = .0009), (3) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion need at months 3 and/or 6 (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 0.95-2.88; P = .07), and (4) RBC transfusion need at all time points (ie, baseline and months 3 and 6; HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.19-4.54; P = .02). Hence, we developed a prognostic model, named Response to Ruxolitinib After 6 Months (RR6), dissecting 3 risk categories: low (median OS, not reached), intermediate (median OS, 61 months; 95% CI, 43-80), and high (median OS, 33 months; 95% CI, 21-50). The RR6 model was validated and confirmed in an external cohort comprised of 40 MF patients. In conclusion, the RR6 prognostic model allows for the early identification of RUX-treated MF patients with impaired survival who might benefit from a prompt treatment shift., (© 2022 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are known to have higher incidence of nonhematological second primary malignancies (SPM) compared to general population. In the MYSEC study on 781 secondary myelofibrosis (SMF) patients, the incidence of SPM after SMF diagnosis resulted 0.98/100 patient-years. When including non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSC), the incidence arose to 1.56/100 patient-years. In SMF, JAK inhibitor treatment was associated only with NMSC occurrence. Then, we merged the MYSEC cohort with a large dataset of PV and ET not evolving into SMF. In this subanalysis, we did not find any correlation between SPM and SMF occurrence. These findings highlight the need of studies aimed at identifying MPN patients at higher risk of SPM., (© 2019 The Authors. Cancer Medicine published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (SCT) is the only curative option for patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF), but information on its net advantage over conventional therapies is lacking. Using ad hoc statistical analysis, we determined outcomes in 438 patients <65 years old at diagnosis who received allogenic SCT (n = 190) or conventional therapies (n = 248). Among patients at low risk per the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) model, the relative risk of death after allogenic SCT vs those treated with nontransplant modalities was 5.6 (95% CI, 1.7-19; P = .0051); for intermediate-1 risk it was 1.6 (95% CI, 0.79-3.2; P = .19), for intermediate-2 risk, 0.55 (95% CI, 0.36-0.83; P = .005), and for high risk, 0.37 (95% CI, 0.21-0.66; P = .0007). Thus, patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk PMF clearly benefit from allogenic SCT. Patients at low risk should receive nontransplant therapy, whereas individual counseling is indicated for patients at intermediate-1 risk., (© 2015 by The American Society of Hematology.)