The effect of initial molecular profile on response to recombinant interferon-α (rIFNα) treatment in early myelofibrosis

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions | Diagnosis, Outcomes, and Management of Prefibrotic Myelofibrosis

Prefibrotic primary myelofibrosis (prefibrotic PMF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm with distinct characteristics comprising histopathological and clinico-biological parameters. It is classified as a subtype of primary myelofibrosis. In clinical practice, it is essential to correctly distinguish prefibrotic PMF from essential thrombocythemia especially but also overt PMF besides other myeloid neoplasms. Risk stratification and survival outcomes for prefibrotic PMF are worse than that of ET but better than that of overt PMF. Rates of progression to overt PMF and blast phase disease are also higher for prefibrotic PMF than ET. In this review we first discuss the historical context to the evolution of prefibrotic PMF as an entity, its presenting features and diagnostic criteria. We emphasize the differences between prefibrotic PMF, ET, and overt PMF with regards to presenting features and disease outcomes including thrombohemorrhagic events and progression to fibrotic and blast phase disease. Next, we discuss the risk stratification models and contextualize these in the setting of clinical management. We share our view of personalizing treatment to address unique patient needs in the context of currently available management options. Lastly, we discuss areas of critical need in clinical research and speculate on the possibility of future disease course modifying therapies in prefibrotic PMF.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms in the adolescent and young adult population: A comprehensive review of the literature

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are characterized by a clonal proliferation of myeloid lineage cells within the bone marrow. The classical BCR-ABL negative MPNs are comprised of polycythaemia vera, essential thrombocythaemia and primary myelofibrosis. Historically, the majority of MPNs are diagnosed in adults older than 60 years of age; however, in recent years, there has been recognition of MPNs in the adolescent and young adult (AYA) population. AYAs with MPN, typically defined as between the ages of 15 and 39 years old, may comprise up to 20% of patients diagnosed with MPN. They demonstrate unique patterns of driver mutations and thrombotic events and remain at risk for progression to more aggressive disease states. Given the likely long length of time they will live with their disease, there is a significant unmet need in identifying well-tolerated and effective treatment options for these patients, particularly with the advent of disease modification. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical features, disease course and management of AYA patients with MPN and, in doing so, highlight key characteristics that distinguish them from their older counterparts.

Management of Patients with Early Myelofibrosis: A Discussion of Best Practices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Summarize best practices for management of patients with early myelofibrosis (MF).

RECENT FINDINGS

Myelofibrosis is a progressive myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) that generally produces burdensome symptoms and ultimately leads to worse overall survival than that observed in healthy controls or patients with other MPNs. Several Janus kinase inhibitors and various interferon formulations are now available for treatment of MF, with ruxolitinib notable for extending overall survival in addition to improving MF signs and symptoms. The chronic nature of the disease can lead some patients to avoid immediate treatment in favor of a watch-and-wait approach. This review summarizes the patient management approach taken in my practice, providing guidance and a discussion of best practices with an emphasis on the importance and clinical benefits of active treatment in early MF. In particular, a case is made to consider treatment with ruxolitinib for patients with intermediate-1 risk disease and to minimize delay between diagnosis and treatment initiation for patients with intermediate or high-risk disease.

Molecular Genetic Profile of Myelofibrosis: Implications in the Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Treatment Advancements

Myelofibrosis (MF) is an essential element of primary myelofibrosis, whereas secondary MF may develop in the advanced stages of other myeloid neoplasms, especially polycythemia vera and essential thrombocythemia. Over the last two decades, advances in molecular diagnostic techniques, particularly the integration of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratories, have revolutionized the diagnosis, classification, and clinical decision making of myelofibrosis. Driver mutations involving JAK2, CALR, and MPL induce hyperactivity in the JAK-STAT signaling pathway, which plays a central role in cell survival and proliferation. Approximately 80% of myelofibrosis cases harbor additional mutations, frequently in the genes responsible for epigenetic regulation and RNA splicing. Detecting these mutations is crucial for diagnosing myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), especially in cases where no mutations are present in the three driver genes (triple-negative MPNs). While fibrosis in the bone marrow results from the disturbance of inflammatory cytokines, it is fundamentally associated with mutation-driven hematopoiesis. The mutation profile and order of acquiring diverse mutations influence the MPN phenotype. Mutation profiling reveals clonal diversity in MF, offering insights into the clonal evolution of neoplastic progression. Prognostic prediction plays a pivotal role in guiding the treatment of myelofibrosis. Mutation profiles and cytogenetic abnormalities have been integrated into advanced prognostic scoring systems and personalized risk stratification for MF. Presently, JAK inhibitors are part of the standard of care for MF, with newer generations developed for enhanced efficacy and reduced adverse effects. However, only a minority of patients have achieved a significant molecular-level response. Clinical trials exploring innovative approaches, such as combining hypomethylation agents that target epigenetic regulators, drugs proven effective in myelodysplastic syndrome, or immune and inflammatory modulators with JAK inhibitors, have demonstrated promising results. These combinations may be more effective in patients with high-risk mutations and complex mutation profiles. Expanding mutation profiling studies with more sensitive and specific molecular methods, as well as sequencing a broader spectrum of genes in clinical patients, may reveal molecular mechanisms in cases currently lacking detectable driver mutations, provide a better understanding of the association between genetic alterations and clinical phenotypes, and offer valuable information to advance personalized treatment protocols to improve long-term survival and eradicate mutant clones with the hope of curing MF.

Myelofibrosis

The clinical phenotype of primary and post-polycythemia vera and postessential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (MF) is dominated by splenomegaly, symptomatology, a variety of blood cell alterations, and a tendency to develop vascular complications and blast phase. Diagnosis requires assessing complete cell blood counts, bone marrow morphology, deep genetic evaluations, and disease history. Driver molecular events consist of JAK2V617F, CALR, and MPL mutations, whereas about 8% to 10% of MF are "triple-negative." Additional myeloid-gene variants are described in roughly 80% of patients. Currently available clinical-based and integrated clinical/molecular-based scoring systems predict the survival of patients with MF and are applied for conventional treatment decision-making, indication to stem cell transplant (SCT) and allocation in clinical trials. Standard treatment consists of anemia-oriented therapies, hydroxyurea, and JAK inhibitors such as ruxolitinib, fedratinib, and pacritinib. Overall, spleen volume reduction of 35% or greater at week 24 can be achieved by 42% of ruxolitinib-, 47% of fedratinib-, 19% of pacritinib-, and 27% of momelotinib-treated patients. Now, it is time to move towards new paradigms for evaluating efficacy like disease modification, that we intend as a robust and unequivocal effect on disease biology and/or on patient survival. The growing number of clinical trials potentially pave the way for new strategies in patients with MF. Translational studies of some molecules showed an early effect on bone marrow fibrosis and on variant allele frequencies of myeloid genes. SCT is still the only curative option, however, it is associated with relevant challenges. This review focuses on the diagnosis, prognostication, and treatment of MF.

Inhibition of ERK1/2 signaling prevents bone marrow fibrosis by reducing osteopontin plasma levels in a myelofibrosis mouse model

Clonal myeloproliferation and development of bone marrow (BM) fibrosis are the major pathogenetic events in myelofibrosis (MF). The identification of novel antifibrotic strategies is of utmost importance since the effectiveness of current therapies in reverting BM fibrosis is debated. We previously demonstrated that osteopontin (OPN) has a profibrotic role in MF by promoting mesenchymal stromal cells proliferation and collagen production. Moreover, increased plasma OPN correlated with higher BM fibrosis grade and inferior overall survival in MF patients. To understand whether OPN is a druggable target in MF, we assessed putative inhibitors of OPN expression in vitro and identified ERK1/2 as a major regulator of OPN production. Increased OPN plasma levels were associated with BM fibrosis development in the Romiplostim-induced MF mouse model. Moreover, ERK1/2 inhibition led to a remarkable reduction of OPN production and BM fibrosis in Romiplostim-treated mice. Strikingly, the antifibrotic effect of ERK1/2 inhibition can be mainly ascribed to the reduced OPN production since it could be recapitulated through the administration of anti-OPN neutralizing antibody. Our results demonstrate that OPN is a novel druggable target in MF and pave the way to antifibrotic therapies based on the inhibition of ERK1/2-driven OPN production or the neutralization of OPN activity.

Essential Thrombocythemia and Post-Essential Thrombocythemia Myelofibrosis: Updates on Diagnosis, Clinical Aspects, and Management

Although several decades have passed since the description of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), many aspects of their pathophysiology have not been elucidated. In this review, we discuss the mutational landscape of patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET), prognostic scores and salient pathology, and clinical points. We discuss also the diagnostic challenges of differentiating ET from prefibrotic MF. We then focus on post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (post-ET MF), a rare subset of MPN that is usually studied in conjunction with post-polycythemia vera MF. The transition of ET to post-ET MF is not well studied on a molecular level, and we present available data. Patients with secondary MF could benefit from allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, and we present available data focusing on post-ET MF.

Myeloproliferative Neoplasms, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

The classic Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) consist of myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera, and essential thrombocythemia and are a heterogeneous group of clonal blood disorders characterized by an overproduction of blood cells. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for MPN were developed as a result of meetings convened by a multidisciplinary panel with expertise in MPN, with the goal of providing recommendations for the management of MPN in adults. The Guidelines include recommendations for the diagnostic workup, risk stratification, treatment, and supportive care strategies for the management of myelofibrosis, polycythemia vera, and essential thrombocythemia. Assessment of symptoms at baseline and monitoring of symptom status during the course of treatment is recommended for all patients. This article focuses on the recommendations as outlined in the NCCN Guidelines for the diagnosis of MPN and the risk stratification, management, and supportive care relevant to MF.

Impact of molecular profiling on the management of patients with myelofibrosis

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) characterized by a highly heterogeneous clinical course, which can be complicated by severe constitutional symptoms, massive splenomegaly, progressive bone marrow failure, cardiovascular events, and development of acute leukemia. Constitutive signaling through the JAK-STAT pathway plays a fundamental role in its pathogenesis, generally due to activating mutations of JAK2, CALR and MPL genes (i.e., the MPN driver mutations), present in most MF patients. Next Generation Sequencing (NGS) panel testing has shown that additional somatic mutations can already be detected at the time of diagnosis in more than half of patients, and that they accumulate along the disease course. These mutations, mostly affecting epigenetic modifiers or spliceosome components, may cooperate with MPN drivers to favor clonal dominance or influence the clinical phenotype, and some, such as high molecular risk mutations, correlate with a more aggressive clinical course with poor treatment response. The current main role of molecular profiling in clinical practice is prognostication, principally for selecting high-risk patients who may be candidates for transplantation, the only curative treatment for MF to date. To this end, contemporary prognostic models incorporating molecular data are useful tools to discriminate different risk categories. Aside from certain clinical situations, decisions regarding medical treatment are not based on patient molecular profiling, yet this approach may become more relevant in novel treatment strategies, such as the use of vaccines against the mutant forms of JAK2 or CALR, or drugs directed against actionable molecular targets.

Inferring the dynamic of mutated hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells induced by IFNα in myeloproliferative neoplasms

Classical BCR-ABL-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are clonal disorders of hematopoietic stem cells (HSC) caused mainly by recurrent mutations in genes encoding JAK2 (JAK2), calreticulin (CALR), or the thrombopoietin receptor (MPL). Interferon alpha (IFNα) has demonstrated some efficacy in inducing molecular remission in MPN. In order to determine factors that influence molecular response rate, we evaluated the long-term molecular efficacy of IFNα in MPN patients by monitoring the fate of cells carrying driver mutations in a prospective observational and longitudinal study of 48 patients over more than 5 years. We measured several times per year the clonal architecture of early and late hematopoietic progenitors (84,845 measurements) and the global variant allele frequency in mature cells (409 measurements). Using mathematical modeling and hierarchical Bayesian inference, we further inferred the dynamics of IFNα-targeted mutated HSC. Our data support the hypothesis that IFNα targets JAK2V617F HSC by inducing their exit from quiescence and differentiation into progenitors. Our observations indicate that treatment efficacy is higher in homozygous than heterozygous JAK2V617F HSC and increases with high IFNα dosage in heterozygous JAK2V617F HSC. Besides, we found that the molecular responses of CALRm HSC to IFNα were heterogeneous, varying between type 1 and type 2 CALRm, and high dosage of IFNα correlates with worse outcomes. Together, our work indicates that the long-term molecular efficacy of IFNα implies an HSC exhaustion mechanism and depends on both the driver mutation type and IFNα dosage.

The clinical role of interferon alpha in Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are clonal hematopoietic stem cell malignancies. Chronic inflammation and a dysregulated immune system are central to the pathogenesis and progression of MPNs. Interferon alpha (IFNα) was first used for the treatment of MPNs approximately 40 years ago. It has significant antiviral effects and plays a role in anti-proliferative, pro-apoptotic, and immunomodulatory responses. IFNα is an effective drug that can simultaneously induce significant rates of clinical, hematological, molecular, and histopathological responses, suggesting that the disease may be cured in some patients. However, its frequent dosage and toxicity profile are major barriers to its widespread use. Pegylated IFNα (peg-IFNα), and more recently, ropeginterferon alpha-2b (ropeg-IFNα-2b), are expected to overcome these drawbacks. The objective of this article is to discuss the clinical role of IFNα in Philadelphia-negative MPNs through a review of recent studies. In particular, it is expected that new IFNs, such as peg-IFNα and ropeg-IFNα-2b, with lower rates of discontinuation due to fewer adverse effects, will play important clinical roles.

Response to pegylated interferon in a COVID-19-positive elderly woman with primary myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib

An 83-year-old female had asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection while taking ruxolitinib. She remained RT-PCR positive for viral RNA for >120 days, and Pegylated interferon for 4 weeks led to viral RNA clearance. The observations support combination therapy of ruxolitinib + interferon for COVID-19.

Interferon-alpha for treating polycythemia vera yields improved myelofibrosis-free and overall survival

Interferon-alpha (rIFNα) is the only disease-modifying treatment for polycythemia vera (PV), but whether or not it prolongs survival is unknown. This large single center retrospective study of 470 PV patients compares the myelofibrosis-free survival (MFS) and overall survival (OS) with rIFNα to two other primary treatments, hydroxyurea (HU) and phlebotomy-only (PHL-O). The median age at diagnosis was 54 years (range 20-94) and the median follow-up was 10 years (range 0-45). Two hundred and twenty-nine patients were women (49%) and 208 were high-risk (44%). The primary treatment was rIFNα in 93 (20%), HU in 189 (40%), PHL-O in 133 (28%) and other cytoreductive drugs in 55 (12%). The treatment groups differed by ELN risk score (p < 0.001). In low-risk patients, 20-year MFS for rIFNα, HU, and PHL-O was 84%, 65% and 55% respectively (p < 0.001) and 20-year OS was 100%, 85% and 80% respectively (p = 0.44). In high-risk patients, 20-year MFS for rIFNα, HU, and PHL-O was 89%, 41% and 36% respectively (p = 0.19) and 20-year OS was 66%, 40%, 14% respectively (p = 0.016). In multivariable analysis, longer time on rIFNα was associated with a lower risk of myelofibrosis (HR: 0.91, p < 0.001) and lower mortality (HR: 0.94, p = 0.012). In conclusion, this study supports treatment of PV with rIFNα to prevent myelofibrosis and potentially prolong survival.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms treated with hydroxyurea, pegylated interferon alpha-2A or ruxolitinib: clinicohematologic responses, quality-of-life changes and safety in the real-world setting

Introduction: Real-world data of responses, quality-of-life (QOL) changes and adverse events in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) on conventional therapy (hydroxyurea ± anagrelide), pegylated interferon alpha-2A (PEG-IFNα-2A) or ruxolitinib are limited. Methods: We prospectively studied MPN patients receiving conventional therapy, PEG-IFNα-2A or ruxolitinib. Next-generation sequencing of 69 myeloid-related genes was performed. Clinicohematologic responses, adverse events, and QOL (determined by the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score, MPN-SAF TSS) were evaluated. Results: Seventy men and fifty-five women with polycythemia vera (PV) (N = 23), essential thrombocythemia (ET) (N = 56) and myelofibrosis (MF) (N = 46) were studied for a median of 36 (range: 19-42) months. In PV, responses were comparable for different modalities. CREBBP mutations were associated with inferior responses. In ET, PEG-IFNα-2A resulted in superior clinicohematologic complete responses (CHCR) (P = 0.045). In MF, superior overall response rates (ORR) were associated with ruxolintib (P = 0.018) and JAK2V617F mutation (P = 0.04). For the whole cohort, ruxolitinib led to rapid and sustained reduction in spleen size within the first 6 months, and significant improvement of QOL as reflected by reduction in MPN-SAF TSS (P < 0.001). Adverse events of grades 1-2 were observed in 44%, 62% and 20% of patients receiving conventional therapy, PEG-IFNα-2A and ruxolitinib respectively; and of grade 3-4 in 7% and 9% of patients receiving PEG-IFNα-2A and ruxolitinib. Conclusions: Conventional therapy, PEG-IFNα-2A and ruxolitinib induced responses in all MPN subtypes. PEG-IFNα-2A led to superior CHCR in ET; whereas ruxolitinib resulted in superior ORR in MF, and significant reduction in spleen size and improvement in QOL.

The Genetic Basis of Primary Myelofibrosis and Its Clinical Relevance

Among classical BCR-ABL-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is the most aggressive subtype from a clinical standpoint, posing a great challenge to clinicians. Whilst the biological consequences of the three MPN driver gene mutations (JAK2, CALR, and MPL) have been well described, recent data has shed light on the complex and dynamic structure of PMF, that involves competing disease subclones, sequentially acquired genomic events, mostly in genes that are recurrently mutated in several myeloid neoplasms and in clonal hematopoiesis, and biological interactions between clonal hematopoietic stem cells and abnormal bone marrow niches. These observations may contribute to explain the wide heterogeneity in patients' clinical presentation and prognosis, and support the recent effort to include molecular information in prognostic scoring systems used for therapeutic decision-making, leading to promising clinical translation. In this review, we aim to address the topic of PMF molecular genetics, focusing on four questions: (1) what is the role of mutations on disease pathogenesis? (2) what is their impact on patients' clinical phenotype? (3) how do we integrate gene mutations in the risk stratification process? (4) how do we take advantage of molecular genetics when it comes to treatment decisions?

Developing strategies to reduce the duration of therapy for patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

All current treatment strategies for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) patients with the exception of allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) are continuously administered. Treatment approaches that reduce the degree of minimal residual disease (MRD) might permit possible drug holidays or potential cures.

AREA COVERED

Authors discuss the presently available agents and those that are under clinical development that might induce a state of MRD and can be administered intermittently. Data extracted from a comprehensive search of peer review literature performed in Pubmed as well as information presented in scientific meetings.

EXPERT OPINION

Currently, the only potential curative treatment for MPN is ASCT. ASCT requires a period of intense treatment but ultimately allows the patient to enjoy a period independent of continued treatment. There is evidence that intermittent use of busulfan or prolonged use of IFN-α can induce hematological remissions that are sustained for prolonged periods of time, allowing for drug holidays. The experimental drug Imetelstat is a promising drug that has been reported to prolong survival in very high-risk myelofibrosis patients after a limited period of time of administration. New experimental drugs and drug combinations that target the malignant clone and/or microenvironmental abnormalities have the potential to eliminate MRD, which might allow for drug holidays and reduction in the duration of therapy.

Interferon Therapy in Myelofibrosis: Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by progressive bone marrow failure, increased risk of progression to acute myeloid leukemia, and constitutional symptoms. For over 3 decades, various formulations of interferon (IFN) have been used for the treatment of MF, with variable results, and the role of IFN in the treatment of MF is evolving.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, Medline and Embase via Ovid, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Web of Science were searched from inception through March 2019 for studies of pegylated IFN (peg-IFN) and non-peg-IFN in MF patients. The primary outcome of overall response rate was defined as a composite of complete response, partial response, complete hematologic response, and partial hematologic response. Random-effects models were used to pool overall response rate, and metaregression analyses were performed to compare peg-IFN and non--peg-IFN formulations.

RESULTS

Among the 10 studies with 141 MF patients included, the overall response rate was 49.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 30.4-69.3), and there was no statistically significant difference (P = .99) between peg-IFN (50.0%; 95% CI, 26.2-73.9; I2 = 76.9%) and non-peg-IFN (49.6%; 95% CI, 20.5-79.0; I2 = 56.7%). Treatment discontinuation resulting from adverse events was common with non-peg-IFN at 35.8% (95% CI, 3.5-68.1) per year, and less in the one study on peg-IFN (0.5% per year).

CONCLUSION

IFN can lead to hematologic improvements in a subset of MF patients, but study quality is limited and heterogenous. Biomarkers predicting response to IFN and formulations with improved tolerability are needed.

[The prognostic value of ASXL1 mutation in primary myelofibrosis. Literature review and clinical case description]

Primary myelofibrosis is a myeloproliferative neoplasm that occurs de novo, characterized by clonal proliferation of stem cells, abnormal expression of cytokines, bone marrow fibrosis, hepatosplenomegaly as a result of extramedullary hematopoiesis, symptoms of tumor intoxication, cachexemia, peripheral blood leukoerythroblastosis, leukemic progression and low survival. Primary myelofibrosis is a chronic incurable disease. The aims of therapy: preventing progression, increasing overall survival, improving quality of life. The choice of therapeutic tactics is limited. Allogenic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is the only method that gives a chance for a cure. The role of mutations in a number of genes in the early identification of candidates for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is being actively studied. The article describes the clinical case of the detection ofASXL1gene mutations in a patient with prefibrous primary myelofibrosis. The diagnosis was established on the basis of WHO criteria 2016. The examination revealed a mutation ofASXL1. Interferon alfa therapy is carried out, against the background of which clinico-hematological remission has been achieved. Despite the identified mutation, the patient is not a candidate for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Given the unfavorable prognostic value of theASXL1mutation, the patient is subject to active dynamic observation and aggressive therapeutic tactics when signs of disease progression appear.

Ruxolitinib and interferon-α2 combination therapy for patients with polycythemia vera or myelofibrosis: a phase II study

We report the final 2-year end-of-study results from the first clinical trial investigating combination treatment with ruxolitinib and low-dose pegylated interferon-α2 (PEG-IFNα2). The study included 32 patients with polycythemia vera and 18 with primary or secondary myelofibrosis; 46 patients were previously intolerant of or refractory to PEGIFNα2. The primary outcome was efficacy, based on hematologic parameters, quality of life measurements, and JAK2 V617F allele burden. We used the 2013 European LeukemiaNet and International Working Group- Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Research and Treatment response criteria, including response in symptoms, splenomegaly, peripheral blood counts, and bone marrow. Of 32 patients with polycythemia vera, ten (31%) achieved a remission which was a complete remission in three (9%) cases. Of 18 patients with myelofibrosis, eight (44%) achieved a remission; five (28%) were complete remissions. The cumulative incidence of peripheral blood count remission was 0.85 and 0.75 for patients with polycythemia vera and myelofibrosis, respectively. The Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form total symptom score decreased from 22 [95% confidence interval (95% CI):, 16-29] at baseline to 15 (95% CI: 10-22) after 2 years. The median JAK2 V617F allele burden decreased from 47% (95% CI: 33-61%) to 12% (95% CI: 6-22%), and 41% of patients achieved a molecular response. The drop-out rate was 6% among patients with polycythemia vera and 32% among those with myelofibrosis. Of 36 patients previously intolerant of PEG-IFNα2, 31 (86%) completed the study, and 24 (67%) of these received PEG-IFNα2 throughout the study. In conclusion, combination treatment improved cell counts, reduced bone marrow cellularity and fibrosis, decreased JAK2 V617F burden, and reduced symptom burden with acceptable toxicity in several patients with polycythemia vera or myelofibrosis. #EudraCT2013-003295-12.

Next Generation Sequencing in MPNs. Lessons from the Past and Prospects for Use as Predictors of Prognosis and Treatment Responses

The myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are acquired hematological stem cell neoplasms characterized by driver mutations in JAK2, CALR, or MPL. Additive mutations may appear in predominantly epigenetic regulator, RNA splicing and signaling pathway genes. These molecular mutations are a hallmark of diagnostic, prognostic, and therapeutic assessment in patients with MPNs. Over the past decade, next generation sequencing (NGS) has identified multiple somatic mutations in MPNs and has contributed substantially to our understanding of the disease pathogenesis highlighting the role of clonal evolution in disease progression. In addition, disease prognostication has expanded from encompassing only clinical decision making to include genomics in prognostic scoring systems. Taking into account the decreasing costs and increasing speed and availability of high throughput technologies, the integration of NGS into a diagnostic, prognostic and therapeutic pipeline is within reach. In this review, these aspects will be discussed highlighting their role regarding disease outcome and treatment modalities in patients with MPNs.

The Rationale for Immunotherapy in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The classic, chronic Philadelphia chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN)-essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), and myelofibrosis (MF)-are clonal malignancies of hematopoietic stem cells and are associated with myeloproliferation, organomegaly, and constitutional symptoms. Expanding knowledge that chronic inflammation and a dysregulated immune system are central to the pathogenesis and progression of MPNs serves as a driving force for the development of agents affecting the immune system as therapy for MPN. This review describes the rationale and potential impact of anti-inflammatory, immunomodulatory, and targeted agents in MPNs.

RECENT FINDINGS

The advances in molecular insights, especially the discovery of the Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) V617F mutation and its role in JAK-STAT pathway dysregulation, led to the development of the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib, which currently represents the cornerstone of medical therapy in MF and hydroxyurea-resistant/intolerant PV. However, there remain significant unmet needs in the treatment of these patients, and many agents continue to be investigated. Novel, more selective JAK inhibitors might offer reduced myelosuppression or even improvement of blood counts. The recent approval of a novel, long-acting interferon for PV patients in Europe, might eventually lead to its broader clinical use in all MPNs. Targeted immunotherapy involving monoclonal antibodies, checkpoint inhibitors, or therapeutic vaccines against selected MPN epitopes could further enhance tumor-specific immune responses. Immunotherapeutic approaches are expanding and hopefully will extend the therapeutic armamentarium in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Use of Interferon Alfa in the Treatment of Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Perspectives and Review of the Literature

Interferon alfa was first used in the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) over 30 years ago. However, its initial use was hampered by its side effect profile and lack of official regulatory approval for MPN treatment. Recently, there has been renewed interest in the use of interferon in MPNs, given its potential disease-modifying effects, with associated molecular and histopathological responses. The development of pegylated formulations and, more recently, ropeginterferon alfa-2b has resulted in improved tolerability and further expansion of interferon's use. We review the evolving clinical use of interferon in essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), and myelofibrosis (MF). We discuss interferon's place in MPN treatment in the context of the most recent clinical trial results evaluating interferon and its pegylated formulations, and its role in special populations such as young and pregnant MPN patients. Interferon has re-emerged as an important option in MPN patients, with future studies seeking to re-establish its place in the existing treatment algorithm for MPN, and potentially expanding its use for novel indications and combination therapies.

The SMAC mimetic LCL-161 selectively targets JAK2V617F mutant cells

Background

Evasion from programmed cell death is a hallmark of cancer and can be achieved in cancer cells by overexpression of inhibitor of apoptosis proteins (IAPs). Second mitochondria-derived activator of caspases (SMAC) directly bind to IAPs and promote apoptosis; thus, SMAC mimetics have been investigated in a variety of cancer types. particularly in diseases with high inflammation and NFĸB activation. Given that elevated TNFα levels and NFĸB activation is a characteristic feature of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), we investigated the effect of the SMAC mimetic LCL-161 on MPN cell survival in vitro and disease development in vivo.

Methods

To investigate the effect of the SMAC mimetic LCL-161 in vitro, we utilized murine and human cell lines to perform cell viability assays as well as primary bone marrow from mice or humans with JAK2^V617F-driven MPN to interrogate myeloid colony formation. To elucidate the effect of the SMAC mimetic LCL-161 in vivo, we treated a JAK2^V617F-driven mouse model of MPN with LCL-161 then assessed blood counts, splenomegaly, and myelofibrosis.

Results

We found that JAK2^V617F-mutated cells are hypersensitive to the SMAC mimetic LCL-161 in the absence of exogenous TNFα. JAK2 kinase activity and NFĸB activation is required for JAK2^V617F-mediated sensitivity to LCL-161, as JAK or NFĸB inhibitors diminished the differential sensitivity of JAK2^V617F mutant cells to IAP inhibition. Finally, LCL-161 reduces splenomegaly and may reduce fibrosis in a mouse model of JAK2^V617F-driven MPN.

Conclusion

LCL-161 may be therapeutically useful in MPN, in particular when exogenous TNFα signaling is blocked. NFĸB activation is a characteristic feature of JAK2^V617F mutant cells and this sensitizes them to SMAC mimetic induced killing even in the absence of TNFα. However, when exogenous TNFα is added, NFĸB is activated in both mutant and wild-type cells, abolishing the differential sensitivity. Moreover, JAK kinase activity is required for the differential sensitivity of JAK2^V617F mutant cells, suggesting that the addition of JAK2 inhibitors to SMAC mimetics would detract from the ability of SMAC mimetics to selectively target JAK2^V617F mutant cells. Instead, combination therapy with other agents that reduce inflammatory cytokines but preserve JAK2 signaling in mutant cells may be a more beneficial combination therapy in MPN.

Myelofibrosis: best practices, controversies and 2019 update

Introduction: Recent advances in the prognostic scheme and treatment of primary and secondary myelofibrosis (MF) have resulted in an overwhelming amount of clinical information to assimilate. The authors believe a comprehensive review that summarizes the most recent published literature, could serve as guidelines for the practicing hematologist.Areas covered: The authors provide a summary of landmark articles regarding epidemiology, symptoms, and pathogenesis of disease. The authors conducted a systematic literature review to answer questions regarding differences between primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and secondary myelofibrosis (SMF), appropriate use and selection of the current risk-stratification models, early versus late treatment of MF and current practices in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HCT) for MF. The authors conclude the article with their clinical opinion based on their experience and literature review. The purpose of this article is to identify current practices, address any variation, identify and investigate conflicting results and produce statements to guide decision-making.Expert opinion: In this section, the authors advocate for and provide examples of a standardized way of incorporating future discoveries in the pathogenesis and risk-stratification models of MF. They also discuss the importance of using only one risk-stratification model for PMF and one for SMF and their reasoning for early instead of late treatment of MF.

Novel strategies for the treatment of myelofibrosis driven by recent advances in understanding the role of the microenvironment in its etiology

Myelofibrosis is the advanced stage of the Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), characterized by systemic inflammation, hematopoietic failure in the bone marrow, and development of extramedullary hematopoiesis, mainly in the spleen. The only potentially curative therapy for this disease is hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, an option that may be offered only to those patients with a compatible donor and with an age and functional status that may face its toxicity. By contrast, with the Philadelphia-positive MPNs that can be dramatically modified by inhibitors of the novel BCR-ABL fusion-protein generated by its genetic lesion, the identification of the molecular lesions that lead to the development of myelofibrosis has not yet translated into a treatment that can modify the natural history of the disease. Therefore, the cure of myelofibrosis remains an unmet clinical need. However, the excitement raised by the discovery of the genetic lesions has inspired additional studies aimed at elucidating the mechanisms driving these neoplasms towards their final stage. These studies have generated the feeling that the cure of myelofibrosis will require targeting both the malignant stem cell clone and its supportive microenvironment. We will summarize here some of the biochemical alterations recently identified in MPNs and the novel therapeutic approaches currently under investigation inspired by these discoveries.

New Concepts of Treatment for Patients with Myelofibrosis

OPINION STATEMENT

Seven years after the approval of the Janus kinase 1/2 (JAK1/2) inhibitor ruxolitinib, it remains the only drug licensed for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients who discontinue ruxolitinib have a dismal outcome, and this is, therefore, an area of significant unmet need. Given the central role that JAK-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) activation plays in disease pathogenesis, there have been many other JAK inhibitors tested, but most have been abandoned, for a variety of reasons. The JAK2-selective inhibitor fedratinib has recently been resurrected, and there has been a resurgence of interest in the failed JAK1/2 inhibitor momelotinib, which possibly improves anemia. Pacritinib, a non-myelosuppressive JAK2-selective inhibitor, is currently in a dose-ranging study mandated by regulatory authorities. A plethora of other targeted agents, most backed by preclinical data, are in various stages of investigation. These include epigenetic and immune therapies, agents targeting cellular survival, metabolic and apoptotic pathways, the cell cycle, DNA repair, and protein folding and degradation, among others. However, at this time, none of these is close to registration or even in a pivotal trial, illustrating the difficulties in recapitulating the clinical disease in preclinical models. Most current clinical trials are testing the addition of a novel agent to ruxolitinib, either in the frontline setting or in the context of an insufficient response to ruxolitinib, or attempting to study new drugs in the second-line, "ruxolitinib failure" setting. Emerging data supports the addition of azacitidine to ruxolitinib in some patients. Other strategies have focused on improving cytopenias, through amelioration of bone marrow fibrosis or other mechanisms. This is important, because cytopenias are the commonest reason for ruxolitinib interruption and/or dose reduction, and dose optimization of ruxolitinib is tied to its survival benefit. The activin receptor ligand trap, sotatercept, and the anti-fibrotic agent, PRM-151, have shown promise in this regard.

JAK2 (and other genes) be nimble with MPN diagnosis, prognosis, and therapy

Now that the spectrum of somatic mutations that initiate, propagate, and drive the progression of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) has largely been defined, recent efforts have focused on integrating this information into clinical decision making. In this regard, the greatest progress has been made in myelofibrosis, in which high-molecular-risk mutations have been identified and incorporated into prognostic models to help guide treatment decisions. In this chapter, we focus on advances in 4 main areas: (1) What are the MPN phenotypic driver mutations? (2) What constitutes high molecular risk in MPN (focusing on ASXL1)? (3) How do we risk-stratify patients with MPN? And (4) What is the significance of molecular genetics for MPN treatment? Although substantial progress has been made, we still have an incomplete understanding of the molecular basis for phenotypic diversity in MPN, and few rationally designed therapeutic approaches to target high-risk mutations are available. Ongoing research efforts in these areas are critical to understanding the biological consequences of genetic heterogeneity in MPN and to improving outcomes for patients.

Prefibrotic myelofibrosis: treatment algorithm 2018

Prefibrotic myelofibrosis (pre-PMF) is a distinct entity among chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm diagnosed according to the revised 2016 WHO classification. The clinical picture is heterogeneous, ranging from isolated thrombocytosis, mimicking essential thrombocythemia (ET), to symptoms of high-risk PMF. Retrospective studies showed that survival of patients with pre-PMF is worse than that of ET and better than overt PMF. Whilst a specific prognostic score is lacking, the International Prognostic Scoring System is able to predict survival in pre-PMF patients, yet failing to separate intermediate-1 and -2 groups, and can be used in clinical practice. Each patient should be evaluated for, and interventions adapted to, both life-expectancy and the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. In low-risk patients with expected long survival, observation only is recommended; in cumulated intermediate-1 and -2 risk cases, whose median survival is projected at more than 10 years, treatment is based on symptoms; in high risk cases, with median survival lower than 5 years, intensive management is required. A pragmatic approach to address the risk of bleeding and thrombosis includes: no treatment or low-dose aspirin in asymptomatic patients; aspirin or oral anticoagulation if previous arterial or venous thrombosis, and hydroxyurea as first-line cytoreduction in case of thrombocytosis or leukocytosis.

Novel treatments to tackle myelofibrosis

INTRODUCTION

Despite the dramatic progress made in the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis since the introduction of the JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib, a therapeutic option that can modify the natural history of the disease and prevent evolution to blast-phase is still lacking. Recent investigational treatments including immunomodulatory drugs and histone deacetylase inhibitors benefit some patients but these effects have proven modest at best. Several novel agents do show promising activity in preclinical studies and early-phase clinical trials. We will illustrate a snapshot view of where the management of myelofibrosis is evolving, in an era of personalized medicine and advanced molecular diagnostics. Areas covered: A literature search using MEDLINE and recent meeting abstracts was performed using the keywords below. It focused on therapies in active phases of development based on their scientific and preclinical rationale with the intent to highlight agents that have novel biological effects. Expert commentary: The most mature advances in treatment of myelofibrosis are the development of second-generation JAK1/2 inhibitors and improvements in expanding access to donors for transplantation. In addition, there are efforts to identify drugs that target pathways other than JAK/STAT signaling that might improve the survival of myelofibrosis patients, and limit the need for stem-cell transplantation.

Perspectives on interferon-alpha in the treatment of polycythemia vera and related myeloproliferative neoplasms: minimal residual disease and cure?

The first clinical trials of the safety and efficacy of interferon-alpha2 (IFN-alpha2) were performed about 30 years ago. Since then, several single-arm studies have convincingly demonstrated that IFN-alpha2 is a highly potent anti-cancer agent in several cancer types but unfortunately not being explored sufficiently due to a high toxicity profile when using non-pegylated IFN-alpha2 or high dosages or due to competitive drugs, that for clinicians at first glance might look more attractive. Within the hematological malignancies, IFN-alpha2 has only recently been revived in patients with the Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms—essential thrombocytosis, polycythemia vera, and myelofibrosis (MPNs)—and in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) in combination with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. In this review, we tell the IFN story in MPNs from the very beginning in the 1980s up to 2018 and describe the perspectives for IFN-alpha2 treatment of MPNs in the future. The mechanisms of actions are discussed and the impact of chronic inflammation as the driving force for clonal expansion and disease progression in MPNs is discussed in the context of combination therapies with potent anti-inflammatory agents, such as the JAK1–2 inhibitors (licensed only ruxolitinib) and statins as well. Interferon-alpha2 being the cornerstone treatment in MPNs and having the potential of inducing minimal residual disease (MRD) with normalization of the bone marrow and low-JAK2V617F allele burden, we believe that combination therapy with ruxolitinib may be even more efficacious and hopefully revert disease progression in many more patients to enter the path towards MRD. In patients with advanced and transforming disease towards leukemic transformation or having transformed to acute myeloid leukemia, “triple therapy” is proposed as a novel treatment modality to be tested in clinical trials combining IFN-alpha2, DNA-hypomethylator, and ruxolitinib. The rationale for this “triple therapy” is given, including the fact that even in AML, IFN-alpha2 as monotherapy may revert disease progression. We envisage a new and bright future with many more patients with MPNs obtaining MRD on the above therapies. From this stage—and even before—vaccination strategies may open a new horizon with cure being the goal for some patients.

Safety and efficacy of combination therapy of interferon-α2 and ruxolitinib in polycythemia vera and myelofibrosis

Interferon‐α2 reduces elevated blood cell counts and splenomegaly in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) and may restore polyclonal hematopoiesis. Its use is limited by inflammation‐mediated toxicity, leading to treatment discontinuation in 10‐30% of patients. Ruxolitinib, a potent anti‐inflammatory agent, has demonstrated benefit in myelofibrosis (MF) and polycythemia vera (PV) patients. Combination therapy (CT) with these two agents may be more efficacious than monotherapy with either, potentially improving tolerability of interferon‐α2 as well. We report the preliminary results from a phase II study of CT with pegylated interferon‐α2 and ruxolitinib in 50 MPN patients (PV, n = 32; low‐/intermediate‐1‐risk MF, n = 18), the majority (n = 47) being resistant and/or intolerant to interferon‐α2 monotherapy. Objectives included remission (2013 revised criteria encompassing histologic, hematologic, and clinical responses), complete hematologic response (CHR), molecular response, and toxicity. Follow‐up was 12 months. Partial remission (PR) and sustained CHR were achieved in 9% and 44% of PV patients, respectively. In MF patients, complete or partial remission was achieved in 39%, and sustained CHR in 58%. The median JAK2V617F allele burden declined significantly in both groups. Hematologic toxicity was the most common adverse event and was managed by dose reduction. Thirty‐seven serious adverse events were recorded in 23 patients; the discontinuation rate was 20%. We conclude that CT with interferon‐α2 and ruxolitinib is efficacious in patients with low‐/intermediate‐1‐risk MF and, to a lesser extent, in patients with PV. These preliminary results encourage phase III studies as well as a study with CT in newly diagnosed MPN patients.

Contemporary Use of Interferon Therapy in the Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this article is to review the current evidence behind interferon therapy in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preliminary analysis suggests that interferon may be non-inferior to hydroxyurea in patients with polycythemia vera and essential thrombocytosis. Responses have been observed regardless of JAK2 mutational status, but the presence of non-JAK2 somatic mutations may negatively influence response rates. Pegylated interferon has proven efficacy for patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms. Both newly diagnosed and previously treated patients with polycythemia vera and essential thrombocytosis exhibit high hematologic response rates, and some of these patients achieve molecular responses as well. Interferon therapy leads to lower rates of hematologic response in MF patients, but patients earlier on in their disease course have a better chance of responding. There are ongoing trials comparing pegylated interferon to hydroxyurea in essential thrombocytosis (ET) and polycythemia vera (PV), and early analysis suggests non-inferiority. However, longer follow-up is needed before drawing any conclusions. Future research is needed to better define characteristics of the best responders and to determine whether novel forms of interferon therapy or combination therapy with interferon can enhance efficacy and tolerability.

Current treatment algorithm for the management of patients with myelofibrosis, JAK inhibitors, and beyond

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a heterogeneous disorder characterized by splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, ineffective hematopoiesis, and an inherent risk of leukemic transformation. The past decade has seen a massive shift in available therapeutic options for our patients and we are learning how and when to use novel agents, either alone or in combination, during the disease course. This has translated into improved management of splenomegaly, significant amelioration in disease-related symptom burden for many, and may lead to improved survival. But limitations in the therapeutic options remain. Moreover, enhanced delineation of the mutational landscape of MF has offered both increasingly complex prognostic algorithms and yielded further potential therapeutic avenues. In this review, we will focus on stratifying both standard and experimental therapeutic management in 2017 and 2018 and postulate on the emerging treatments that will likely become part of our increasingly complex treatment algorithm.

Benefits and pitfalls of pegylated interferon-α2a therapy in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm-associated myelofibrosis: a French Intergroup of Myeloproliferative neoplasms (FIM) study

We have previously described the safety and efficacy of pegylated interferon-α2a therapy in a cohort of 62 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm-associated myelofibrosis followed in centers affiliated to the French Intergroup of Myeloproliferative neoplasms. In this study, we report their long-term outcomes and correlations with mutational patterns of driver and non-driver mutations analyzed by targeted next generation sequencing. The median age at diagnosis was 66 years old, the median follow-up since starting pegylated interferon was 58 months. At the time of analysis, 30 (48.4%) patients were alive including 16 still being treated with pegylated interferon. The median survival of patients with intermediate and high-risk prognostic Lille and dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System scores treated with pegylated interferon was increased in comparison to that of historical cohorts. In addition, overall survival was significantly correlated with the duration of pegylated interferon therapy (70 versus 30 months after 2 years of treatment, P<10⁻¹²). JAK2^V617F allele burden was decreased by more than 50% in 58.8% of patients and two patients even achieved complete molecular response. Next-generation sequencing analyses performed in 49 patients showed that 28 (57.1%) of them carried non-driver mutations. The presence of at least one additional mutation was associated with a reduction of both overall and leukemia-free survival. These findings in a large series of patients with myelofibrosis suggest that pegylated interferon therapy may provide a survival benefit for patients with intermediate- or high-risk Lille and dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System scores. It also reduced the JAK2^V617F allele burden in most patients. These results further support the use of pegylated interferon in selected patients with myelofibrosis.

JAK2 inhibitors for myeloproliferative neoplasms: what is next?

Since its approval in 2011, the Janus kinase 1/2 (JAK1/2) inhibitor ruxolitinib has evolved to become the centerpiece of therapy for myelofibrosis (MF), and its use in patients with hydroxyurea resistant or intolerant polycythemia vera (PV) is steadily increasing. Several other JAK2 inhibitors have entered clinical testing, but none have been approved and many have been discontinued. Importantly, the activity of these agents is not restricted to patients with JAK2 V617F or exon 12 mutations. Although JAK2 inhibitors provide substantial clinical benefit, their disease-modifying activity is limited, and rational combinations with other targeted agents are needed, particularly in MF, in which survival is short. Many such combinations are being explored, as are other novel agents, some of which could successfully be combined with JAK2 inhibitors in the future. In addition, new JAK2 inhibitors with the potential for less myelosuppression continue to be investigated. Given the proven safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib, it is likely that ruxolitinib-based combinations will be a major way forward in drug development for MF. If approved, less myelosuppressive JAK2 inhibitors such as pacritinib or NS-018 could prove to be very useful additions to the therapeutic armamentarium in MF. In PV, inhibitors of histone deacetylases and human double minute 2 have activity, but their role, if any, in the future treatment algorithm is uncertain, given the availability of ruxolitinib and renewed interest in interferons. Ruxolitinib is in late-phase clinical trials in essential thrombocythemia, in which it could fill an important void for patients with troublesome symptoms.