1.
Indication and management of allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in myelofibrosis: updated recommendations by the EBMT/ELN International Working Group
Kröger, N., Bacigalupo, A., Barbui, T., Ditschkowski, M., Gagelmann, N., Griesshammer, M., Gupta, V., Hamad, N., Harrison, C., Hernandez-Boluda, J. C., et al
The Lancet. Haematology. 2023
Abstract
New options for medical therapy and risk scoring systems containing molecular data are leading to increased complexity in the management of patients with myelofibrosis. To inform patients' optimal care, we updated the 2015 guidelines on indications for and management of allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) with the support of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and European LeukemiaNet (ELN). New recommendations were produced using a consensus-building methodology after a comprehensive review of articles released from January, 2015 to December, 2022. Seven domains and 18 key questions were selected through a series of questionnaires using a Delphi process. Key recommendations in this update include: patients with primary myelofibrosis and an intermediate-2 or high-risk Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System score, or a high-risk Mutation-Enhanced International Prognostic Score Systems (MIPSS70 or MIPSS70-plus) score, or a low-risk or intermediate-risk Myelofibrosis Transplant Scoring System score should be considered candidates for allogeneic HSCT. All patients who are candidates for allogeneic HSCT with splenomegaly greater than 5 cm below the left costal margin or splenomegaly-related symptoms should receive a spleen-directed treatment, ideally with a JAK-inhibitor; HLA-matched sibling donors remain the preferred donor source to date. Reduced intensity conditioning and myeloablative conditioning are both valid options for patients with myelofibrosis. Regular post-transplantation driver mutation monitoring is recommended to detect and treat early relapse with donor lymphocyte infusion. In a disease where evidence-based guidance is scarce, these recommendations might help clinicians and patients in shared decision making.
2.
Outcomes following second allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with myelofibrosis: a retrospective study of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of EBMT
Nabergoj, M., Mauff, K., Robin, M., Kröger, N., Angelucci, E., Poiré, X., Passweg, J., Radujkovic, A., Platzbecker, U., Robinson, S., et al
Bone marrow transplantation. 2021
Abstract
Therapeutic management of patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis (MF) who experience relapse or graft failure following allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (allo-HCT) remains heterogeneous. We retrospectively analyzed 216 patients undergoing a second allo-HCT for either relapse (56%) or graft failure (31%) between 2010 and 2017. Median age was 57.3 years (range 51-63). The same donor as for the first allo-HCT was chosen in 66 patients (31%) of whom 19 received an HLA-identical sibling donor, whereas a different donor was chosen for 116 patients (54%). Median follow-up was 40 months. Three-year overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were 42% and 39%, respectively. Three-year non-relapse mortality (NRM) and relapse rates were 36% and 25%, respectively. Grade II-IV and III-IV acute GVHD occurred in 25% and 11% of patients, respectively, and the 3-year incidence of chronic GVHD was 33% including 14% for extensive grade. Graft-failure incidence at 1 year was 14%. In conclusion, our data suggest that a second allo-HCT is a potential option for patients failing first allo-HCT for MF albeit careful patient assessment is fundamental to identify individual patients who could benefit from this approach.
3.
Busulfan or thiotepa based conditioning in myelofibrosis: a phase II multicenter randomized study from the GITMO group
Patriarca, F., Masciulli, A., Bacigalupo, A., Bregante, S., Pavoni, C., Finazzi, M. C., Bosi, A., Russo, D., Narni, F., Messina, G., et al
Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2018
-
-
-
Free full text
-
Editor's Choice
Abstract
We are reporting a randomized study comparing fludarabine in combination with busulfan (FB) or thiotepa (FT), as conditioning regimen for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in patients with myelofibrosis. The primary study endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Sixty patients were enrolled with a median age of 56 years and an intermediate-2 or high-risk score in 65%, according to the Dynamic International Prognostic Staging System (DIPSS). Donors were HLA-identical sibling (n=25), matched unrelated (n=25) or single allele mismatched unrelated (n=10). With a median follow-up of 22 months (range 1-68), the following outcomes at 2 years after HSCT in the FB vs. the FT arm were as follows: PFS 43% vs 55%, (P=.28), overall survival (OS) 54% vs. 70% (P=.17), relapse/progression 36% vs 24% (P=.24), non-relapse mortality (NRM) 21% in both arms (P=.99) and graft failure 14% vs. 10% (P=.96). A better PFS was observed in patients with intermediate-1 DIPSS score (P=.03). Neutrophil and platelet engraftment was significantly influenced by prior splenectomy [HR 2.28 (95% CI, 1.16-4.51) P=.02] and splenomegaly at transplant [HR 0.51 (95% CI, 0.27-0.94) P=.03]. In conclusion, the clinical outcome after HSCT was comparable when using either a busulfan or thiotepa based conditioning regimen.
PICO Summary
Population
Patients with myelofibrosis
Intervention
Fludarabine in combination with busulfan (FB) as conditioning regimen for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT)
Comparison
Fludarabine in combination with thiotepa (FT), as conditioning regimen for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT)
Outcome
At 2 years after HSCT in the FB vs. the FT arm were as follows: PFS 43% vs 55%, (P=.28), overall survival (OS) 54% vs. 70% (P=.17), relapse/progression 36% vs 24% (P=.24), non-relapse mortality (NRM) 21% in both arms (P=.99) and graft failure 14% vs. 10% (P=.96). In conclusion, the clinical outcome after HSCT was comparable when using either a busulfan or thiotepa based conditioning regimen.
4.
MIPSS70: Mutation-Enhanced International Prognostic Score System for Transplantation-Age Patients With Primary Myelofibrosis
Guglielmelli, P., Lasho, T. L., Rotunno, G., Mudireddy, M., Mannarelli, C., Nicolosi, M., Pacilli, A., Pardanani, A., Rumi, E., Rosti, V., et al
Journal of Clinical Oncology : Official Journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. 2018;36(4):310-318
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Purpose To develop a prognostic system for transplantation-age patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF) that integrates clinical, cytogenetic, and mutation data. Patients and Methods The study included 805 patients with PMF age ≤ 70 years recruited from multiple Italian centers and the Mayo Clinic (Rochester, MN), forming two independent learning and validation cohorts. A Cox multivariable model was used to select from among a list of 22 variables those that were predictive of overall survival (OS). Integrated clinical and genetic prognostic models with (MIPSS70-plus) or without (MIPSS70) cytogenetic information were developed. Results Multivariable analysis identified the following as significant risk factors for OS: hemoglobin < 100 g/L, leukocytes > 25 × 10(9)/L, platelets < 100 × 10(9)/L, circulating blasts ≥ 2%, bone marrow fibrosis grade ≥ 2, constitutional symptoms, absence of CALR type-1 mutation, presence of high-molecular risk mutation (ie, ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH1/ 2), and presence of two or more high-molecular risk mutations. By assigning hazard ratio (HR)-weighted points to these variables, three risk categories were delineated for the MIPSS70 model; 5-year OS was 95% in low-risk, 70% in intermediate-risk, and 29% in high-risk categories, corresponding to median OS of 27.7 years (95% CI, 22 to 34 years), 7.1 years (95% CI, 6.2 to 8.1 years), and 2.3 years (95% CI, 1.9 to 2.7 years), respectively. In the MIPSS70-plus model, which included cytogenetic information, four risk categories were delineated, with 5-year OS of 91% in low-risk, 66% in intermediate-risk (HR, 3.2; 95% CI, 1.9 to 5.2), 42% in high-risk (HR, 6.4; 95% CI, 4.1 to 10.0), and 7% very high-risk categories (HR, 17.0; 95% CI, 9.8 to 29.2). Both models remained effective after inclusion of older patients in the analysis. Conclusion MIPSS70 and MIPSS70-plus provide complementary systems of risk stratification for transplantation-age patients with PMF and integrate prognostically relevant clinical, cytogenetic, and mutation data.