30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Application of current prognostic models for primary myelofibrosis in the setting of post-polycythemia vera or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis

      letter

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          The World Health Organization (WHO) classification system recognizes four variants of myelofibrosis (MF): primary (PMF), prefibrotic (pre-PMF), post-essential thrombocythemia (post-ET MF) and post-polycythemia vera (post-PV MF). 1 Current prognostic models in PMF include the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), 2 the dynamic IPSS (DIPSS), 3 and DIPSS-plus. 4 These prognostic systems utilize up to 8 risk factors: age >65 years, hemoglobin <10 g/dl, leukocyte count >25 × 109/l, circulating blasts ⩾1%, presence of constitutional symptoms, unfavorable karyotype, red cell transfusion need and platelet count <100 × 109/l). When these prognostic systems were applied to 1000 consecutive PMF patients from the Mayo Clinic, 5 the application of DIPSS-plus resulted in median survivals of 1.7, 4.7, 8.1 and 19.2 years for high, intermediate-2, intermediate-1 and low-risk patients, respectively; the corresponding median survivals using DIPSS were 1.5, 2.7, 6.3 and 17.5 years and using IPSS 2, 4.6, 6.8 and 17.5 years. The objectives of the current study were as follows: (i) to determine if the aforementioned eight variables used in IPSS/DIPSS/DIPSS-plus are independently predictive of shortened survival in post-PV/ET MF and (ii) to assess the performance of the IPSS, DIPSS and DIPSS-plus risk stratification in post-PV/ET MF. Study patients were selected from the Mayo Clinic institutional database of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). Diagnoses of ET, PV and post-ET/PV MF were according to WHO and International Working Group for MPN research, and treatment criteria. 1, 6 Statistical analyses considered the clinical and laboratory data collected at the time of documented disease transformation from PV to post-PV MF or from ET to post-ET MF. Survival was calculated from the date of disease transformation to the date of death or last contact. A total of 125 patients with post-PV (n=79) or post-ET (n=46) MF were studied (median age 62 years; 50% females); percentages of patients were 46% for age >65 years, 44% for hemoglobin <10 g/dl, 19% for red cell transfusion need, 19% for leukocyte count >25 × 10(9)/l, 14% for platelet count <100 × 10(9)/l, 45% for circulating blasts ⩾1%, 38% for constitutional symptoms and 17% for unfavorable karyotype. Risk distribution of the 125 patients with post-PV/ET MF, according to IPSS, was high in 39 (31%) patients, intermediate-2 in 40 (32%), intermediate-1 in 30 (24%) and low in 16 (13%); the corresponding percentages for DIPSS were 10, 38, 38 and 13%, and for DIPSS-plus 26, 41, 21 and 12%. Comparison of patients with post-PV and post-ET MF disclosed higher hemoglobin level (P=0.002), higher leukocyte count (P=0.0007) and larger palpable spleen size (P=0.002) in post-PV MF. After a median follow-up of 3 years, from the date of fibrotic progression, 86 (69%) deaths and 10 (8%) leukemic transformations were documented. Multivariable analysis, which included the 5 aforementioned risk variables used in IPSS or DIPSS, disclosed independent predictive value for shortened survival, for all but constitutional symptoms: HR (95% CI; P-value) were 2.6 (1.6–4.2; P<0.0001) for age >65 years, 2.2 (1.4–3.5; P=0.001) for circulating blasts ⩾1%, 1.8 (1.1–2.8; P=0.01) for hemoglobin <10 g/dl, 1.8 (1.1–3.1; P=0.02) for leukocyte count >25 × 10(9)/l and 1.2 (0.7–1.9; P=0.5) for constitutional symptoms. Similarly, multivariable analysis that included all eight risk variables used in DIPSS-plus disclosed significant predictive value for all except constitutional symptoms (P=0.9) and leukocyte count >25 × 10(9)/l with borderline significance (P=0.06). Application of IPSS, DIPSS and DIPSS-plus, to the 125 study patients with post-ET/PV MF is outlined in Figure 1. HR (95% CI) using IPSS were 2.3 (1.4–3.7) for high vs intermediate-2, 4.3 (2.2–8.5) for high vs intermediate-1, 6.6 (2.9–15.3) for high vs low, 2.9 (1.3–6.7) for intermediate-2 vs low, 1.9 (1.0–3.8) for intermediate-2 vs intermediate-1 and 1.5 (0.6–3.9) for intermediate-1 vs low; accordingly, IPSS in this group of patients was effective in delienating high- and intermediate-2-risk patients but was less effective in distinguishing low from intermediate-1-risk patients. Similar analyses using DIPSS and DIPSS-plus produced similar results (Figure 1). With the exception of constitutional symptoms, the current study confirms the prognostic value of the eight risk variables used in IPSS, DIPSS and DIPSS-plus, in the setting of post-PV/ET MF. The study also validates the adequate performance of the three prognostic models in delineating high- vs intermediate-2- vs low/intermediate-1-risk patients; the lack of significant distinction between intermediate-1- and low-risk patients, as well as the appearance of similar survival data between intermediate-2- and intermediate-1-risk disease (Figure 1; although significantly different), might be related to either the small number of informative cases or the demonstrated loss of significant contribution from constitutional symptoms. The spirit of our observations is somewhat different than that echoed by our respected colleagues from Italy regarding their recently published new prognostic system for post-ET/PV MF. 7 In the particular study, the authors found constitutional symptoms to retain its significance, along with anemia, thrombocytopenia, advanced age, circulating blasts and absence of CALR mutations, and used these variables to devise a newly-proposed prognostic model. Although the effort to include molecular markers is laudable, it might have been truncated in this instance because of the absence of information on other mutations known to affect outcome in PMF, such as ASXL1 and SRSF2. 8 On the other hand, considering the fact that virtually all patients with post-PV MF are JAK2-mutated, one can argue the appropriateness of using driver mutational status, as a variable for a risk model, in post-PV MF. Consistent with these reservations, another recent study of 359 patients with post-ET/PV MF did not find a survival impact from either the type of driver mutation or its allele burden; 9 instead, the study reported a detrimental effect of triple-negative driver mutational status and SRSF2 mutations in post-ET MF only. From a practical standpoint, our observations provide the evidence to support the use of IPSS/DIPSS/DIPSS-plus in post-PV/ET MF, thus maintaining familiarity and uniformity, until a molecularly more robust system is developed.

          Related collections

          Most cited references3

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Mutations and prognosis in primary myelofibrosis.

          Patient outcome in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is significantly influenced by karyotype. We studied 879 PMF patients to determine the individual and combinatorial prognostic relevance of somatic mutations. Analysis was performed in 483 European patients and the seminal observations were validated in 396 Mayo Clinic patients. Samples from the European cohort, collected at time of diagnosis, were analyzed for mutations in ASXL1, SRSF2, EZH2, TET2, DNMT3A, CBL, IDH1, IDH2, MPL and JAK2. Of these, ASXL1, SRSF2 and EZH2 mutations inter-independently predicted shortened survival. However, only ASXL1 mutations (HR: 2.02; P<0.001) remained significant in the context of the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS). These observations were validated in the Mayo Clinic cohort where mutation and survival analyses were performed from time of referral. ASXL1, SRSF2 and EZH2 mutations were independently associated with poor survival, but only ASXL1 mutations held their prognostic relevance (HR: 1.4; P=0.04) independent of the Dynamic IPSS (DIPSS)-plus model, which incorporates cytogenetic risk. In the European cohort, leukemia-free survival was negatively affected by IDH1/2, SRSF2 and ASXL1 mutations and in the Mayo cohort by IDH1 and SRSF2 mutations. Mutational profiling for ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2 and IDH identifies PMF patients who are at risk for premature death or leukemic transformation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Proposed criteria for the diagnosis of post-polycythemia vera and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis: a consensus statement from the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Epidemiology and clinical relevance of mutations in postpolycythemia vera and postessential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis: A study on 359 patients of the AGIMM group.

              Transformation to secondary myelofibrosis (MF) occurs as part of the natural history of polycythemia vera (PPV-MF) and essential thrombocythemia (PET-MF). Although primary (PMF) and secondary MF are considered similar diseases and managed similarly, there are few studies specifically focused on the latter. The aim of this study was to characterize the mutation landscape, and describe the main clinical correlates and prognostic implications of mutations, in a series of 359 patients with PPV-MF and PET-MF. Compared with PV and ET, the JAK2V617F and CALR mutated allele burden was significantly higher in PPV-MF and/or PET-MF, indicating a role for accumulation of mutated alleles in the process of transformation to MF. However, neither the allele burden nor the type of driver mutation influenced overall survival (OS), while absence of any driver mutation (triple negativity) was associated with significant reduction of OS in PET-MF, similar to PMF. Of the five interrogated subclonal mutations (ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH1, and IDH2), that comprise a prognostically detrimental high molecular risk (HMR) category in PMF, only SRSF2 mutations were associated with reduced survival in PET-MF, and no additional mutation profile with prognostic relevance was highlighted. Overall, these data indicate that the molecular landscape of secondary forms of MF is different from PMF, suggesting that unknown mutational events might contribute to the progression from chronic phase disease to myelofibrosis. These findings also support more extended genotyping approaches aimed at identifying novel molecular abnormalities with prognostic relevance for patients with PPV-MF and PET-MF. Am. J. Hematol. 91:681-686, 2016. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Leukemia
                Leukemia
                Leukemia
                Nature Publishing Group
                0887-6924
                1476-5551
                December 2017
                18 August 2017
                12 September 2017
                : 31
                : 12
                : 2851-2852
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Hematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN, USA
                [2 ]Divisions of Hematopathology, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN, USA
                [3 ]Division of Cytogenetics, Department of Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic , Rochester, MN, USA
                Author notes
                Article
                leu2017268
                10.1038/leu.2017.268
                5729329
                28819279
                fc34178c-2a5f-4a63-ba1b-5404a1ac9b08
                Copyright © 2017 The Author(s)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in the credit line; if the material is not included under the Creative Commons license, users will need to obtain permission from the license holder to reproduce the material. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/

                History
                Categories
                Letter to the Editor

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article