Is allogeneic stem cell transplantation for myelofibrosis still indicated at the time of molecular markers and JAK inhibitors era?

Outcomes of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Patients With Myelofibrosis-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) remains the only potentially curative therapeutic modality for patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis (MF). However, many patients are considered ineligible for allo-HCT, and transplant-related mortality can be substantial. Data on the efficacy and safety of allo-HCT are mixed and largely derived from retrospective studies. We aimed to synthesize the available evidence on the safety and efficacy of allo-HCT in MF and to identify patient, disease, and transplant characteristics with prognostic impact on outcomes of patients with MF undergoing allo-HCT. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science Core Collection were searched from inception to October 11, 2020, for studies on allo-HCT in MF. Random-effects models were used to pool response rates for the co-primary outcomes of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year overall survival (OS). Rates of non-relapse mortality and acute and chronic graft-versus-host-disease (GVHD) were studied as secondary endpoints. Subgroup analyses on the effect of conditioning regimen intensity, baseline dynamic international prognostic scoring system (DIPSS) score, and patient age were performed. The study protocol has been registered on PROSPERO (CRD42020188706). Forty-three studies with 8739 patients were identified and included in this meta-analysis. Rates of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year OS were 66.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 63.5%-69.8%), 64.4% (95% CI, 57.6%-70.6%), and 55.0% (95% CI, 51.8%-58.3%), respectively. Rates of 1-year, 2-year, and 5-year nonrelapse mortality were 25.9% (95% CI, 23.3%-28.7%), 29.7% (95% CI, 24.5%-35.4%), and 30.5% (95% CI, 25.9%-35.5%), respectively. The combined rate of graft failure was 10.6% (95% CI, 8.9%-12.5%) with primary and secondary graft failure occurring in 7.3% (95% CI, 5.7%-9.4%) and 5.9% (95% CI, 4.3%-8.0%) of patients, respectively. Rates of acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease were 44.0% (95% CI, 39.6%-48.4%; grade III/IV: 15.2%) and 46.5% (95% CI, 42.2%-50.8%; extensive or moderate/severe: 26.1%), respectively. Subgroup analyses did not show any significant difference between conditioning regimen intensity (myeloablative versus reduced-intensity), median patient age, and proportion of DIPSS-intermediate-2/high patients. The quality of the evidence is limited by the absence of randomized clinical trials in the field and the heterogeneity of patient and transplant characteristics across included studies. Given the poor prognosis of patients not receiving transplants and in the absence of curative nontransplantation therapies, our results support consideration of allo-HCT for eligible patients with MF.

Impact of ruxolitinib pretreatment on outcomes after allogeneic stem cell transplantation in patients with myelofibrosis

INTRODUCTION

Ruxolitinib is the first approved drug for treatment of myelofibrosis, but its impact of outcome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is unknown.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reported on 159 myelofibrosis patients (pts) with a median age of 59 years (r: 28-74) who received reduced intensity ASCT between 2000 and 2015 in eight German centers from related (n = 23), matched (n = 86) or mismatched (n = 50) unrelated donors. Forty-six (29%) patients received ruxolitinib at any time point prior to ASCT. The median daily dose of ruxolitinib was 30 mg (range 10-40 mg) and the median duration of treatment was 4.9 months (range 0.4-39.1 months).

RESULTS

Primary graft failure was seen in 2 pts (4%) in the ruxolitinib and 3 (2%) in the non-ruxolitinib group. Engraftment and incidence of acute GVHD grade II to IV and III/IV did not differ between groups (37% vs 39% and 19% vs 28%, respectively), nor did the non-relapse mortality at 2 years (23% vs 23%). A trend for lower risk of relapse was seen in the ruxolitinib group (9% vs 17%, P = .2), resulting in a similar 2 year DFS and OS (68% vs 60% and 73% vs 70%, respectively). No difference in any outcome variable could be seen between ruxolitinib responders and those who failed or lost response to ruxolitinib.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that ruxolitinib pretreatment in myelofibrosis patient does not negatively influence outcome after allogeneic stem cell transplantation.

Peritoneal carcinomatosis-like implants of extramedullary hematopoiesis. An insolite occurrence during splenectomy for myelofibrosis

INTRODUCTION

Primary myelofibrosis (MF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm that results in debilitating constitutional symptoms, splenomegaly, and cytopenias. In patients with symptomatic splenomegaly, splenectomy remains a viable treatment option for MF patients with medically refractory symptomatic splenomegaly that precludes the use of ruxolitinib.

CASE PRESENTATION

We present the clinical case of a patient who was admitted to our Department to perform a splenectomy in MF as a therapeutic step prior to an allogeneic stem cell transplantation (ASCT). A laparotomic splenectomy and excision of whitish wide-spread peritoneal and omental nodulations was performed. There were no operative complications and the surgery was completed with minimal blood loss. The histopathological exam revealed an extramedullary hematopoiesis in both spleen and peritoneal nodules.

CONCLUSION

In primary myelofibrosis it must always be kept in mind the possible presence of peritoneal implants of extramedullary hematopoiesis and ascites of reactive genesis. We report a rare case of peritoneal carcinomatosis-like implants of extramedullary hematopoiesis found at splenectomy for MF.