Prognostic value of blasts in peripheral blood in myelofibrosis in the ruxolitinib era.
blasts
myelofibrosis
outcome
ruxolitinib
Journal
Cancer
ISSN: 1097-0142
Titre abrégé: Cancer
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0374236
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 10 2020
01 10 2020
Historique:
received:
09
05
2020
revised:
15
06
2020
accepted:
22
06
2020
pubmed:
23
7
2020
medline:
12
6
2021
entrez:
23
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Circulating blasts (peripheral blood [PB] blasts) ≥1% have long been considered an unfavorable feature for patients with primary myelofibrosis. Whether further quantification of PB blasts and their correlation with bone marrow (BM) blasts have incremental value with regard to patient prognostication is unclear. Similarly, the role of the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) is not well defined in patients who have increased blasts. The authors retrospectively studied 1316 patients with myelofibrosis who presented at their institution between 1984 and 2018 and had available PB and BM blasts. The PB blast percentage influenced overall survival (OS) only among patients who had BM blasts <5%, with a median OS of 64 months for patients with 0% PB blasts, 48 months for those with 1% to 3% PB blasts, and 22 months for those with 4% PB blasts (P < .01). Patients who had 4% PB blasts and 5% to 9% BM/PB blasts had clinical features similar to those of patients who had 10% to 19% blasts. Although the OS of the former patients was longer than in patients who had 10% to 19% blasts, it was not statistically different (median OS: 22, 26, and 13 months, respectively; P > .05). Forty-four percent of patients received RUX throughout their disease course. All patients who had <10% blasts (PB or BM) and received treatment with RUX had superior OS compared with those who did not receive RUX within the same group. PB blasts ≥4% and BM blasts ≥5% were significant for predicting inferior survival in multivariate analysis. The current results provide comprehensive insight into the role of peripheral blasts in patients with myelofibrosis and indicates that patients who have PB blasts ≥4% have an unfavorable prognosis. RUX provides a survival benefit to patients who have PB blasts <10%.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Circulating blasts (peripheral blood [PB] blasts) ≥1% have long been considered an unfavorable feature for patients with primary myelofibrosis. Whether further quantification of PB blasts and their correlation with bone marrow (BM) blasts have incremental value with regard to patient prognostication is unclear. Similarly, the role of the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) is not well defined in patients who have increased blasts.
METHODS
The authors retrospectively studied 1316 patients with myelofibrosis who presented at their institution between 1984 and 2018 and had available PB and BM blasts.
RESULTS
The PB blast percentage influenced overall survival (OS) only among patients who had BM blasts <5%, with a median OS of 64 months for patients with 0% PB blasts, 48 months for those with 1% to 3% PB blasts, and 22 months for those with 4% PB blasts (P < .01). Patients who had 4% PB blasts and 5% to 9% BM/PB blasts had clinical features similar to those of patients who had 10% to 19% blasts. Although the OS of the former patients was longer than in patients who had 10% to 19% blasts, it was not statistically different (median OS: 22, 26, and 13 months, respectively; P > .05). Forty-four percent of patients received RUX throughout their disease course. All patients who had <10% blasts (PB or BM) and received treatment with RUX had superior OS compared with those who did not receive RUX within the same group. PB blasts ≥4% and BM blasts ≥5% were significant for predicting inferior survival in multivariate analysis.
CONCLUSIONS
The current results provide comprehensive insight into the role of peripheral blasts in patients with myelofibrosis and indicates that patients who have PB blasts ≥4% have an unfavorable prognosis. RUX provides a survival benefit to patients who have PB blasts <10%.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32697338
doi: 10.1002/cncr.33094
pmc: PMC7875207
mid: NIHMS1621191
doi:
Substances chimiques
Nitriles
0
Pyrazoles
0
Pyrimidines
0
ruxolitinib
82S8X8XX8H
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
4322-4331Subventions
Organisme : NCI NIH HHS
ID : P30 CA016672
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
© 2020 American Cancer Society.
Références
Haematologica. 2014 Mar;99(3):465-73
pubmed: 24142997
N Engl J Med. 2012 Mar 1;366(9):787-98
pubmed: 22375970
Cancer. 2008 Jun 15;112(12):2726-32
pubmed: 18404742
Leukemia. 2008 Feb;22(2):437-8
pubmed: 17728787
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Feb 1;29(4):392-7
pubmed: 21149668
Blood. 2016 May 19;127(20):2391-405
pubmed: 27069254
Br J Haematol. 2012 Aug;158(4):453-71
pubmed: 22651893
Blood Cancer J. 2019 Jan 25;9(2):12
pubmed: 30683837
Blood. 2010 Oct 14;116(15):2857-8
pubmed: 20947690
Lancet Haematol. 2017 Jul;4(7):e317-e324
pubmed: 28602585
Leukemia. 2011 Jan;25(1):82-8
pubmed: 20944670
Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2016 Aug;16 Suppl:S124-9
pubmed: 27521308
Leukemia. 2016 Aug;30(8):1701-7
pubmed: 27211272
N Engl J Med. 2010 Sep 16;363(12):1117-27
pubmed: 20843246
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Nov 20;27(33):5587-93
pubmed: 19786661
Leukemia. 2018 May;32(5):1057-1069
pubmed: 29515238
Leuk Res. 2015 Sep;39(9):950-6
pubmed: 26183878
Leuk Res. 2015 Mar;39(3):314-7
pubmed: 25636356
Blood. 2009 Mar 26;113(13):2895-901
pubmed: 18988864
Blood Cancer J. 2018 Jun 11;8(6):57
pubmed: 29891917
J Hematol Oncol. 2017 Feb 22;10(1):55
pubmed: 28228106
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Jun 10;36(17):1769-1770
pubmed: 29708808
Blood. 2010 Mar 4;115(9):1703-8
pubmed: 20008785
J Clin Oncol. 2018 Feb 1;36(4):310-318
pubmed: 29226763
Blood Adv. 2018 Dec 26;2(24):3572-3580
pubmed: 30563881
JAMA Oncol. 2015 Aug;1(5):643-51
pubmed: 26181658
Haematologica. 2020 May;105(5):e221-e224
pubmed: 31537690