Traffic lights for ruxolitinib

Philadelphia-Negative MPN: A Molecular Journey, from Hematopoietic Stem Cell to Clinical Features

Philadelphia negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms (MPN) are a heterogeneous group of hematopoietic stem cell diseases. MPNs show different risk grades of thrombotic complications and acute myeloid leukemia evolution. In the last couple of decades, from JAK2 mutation detection in 2005 to the newer molecular trademarks studied through next generation sequencing, we are learning to approach MPNs from a deeper perspective. Here, we intend to elucidate the important factors affecting MPN clonal advantage and the reasons why some patients progress to more aggressive disease. Understanding these mechanisms is the key to developing new treatment approaches and targeted therapies for MPN patients.

Integration of Molecular Information in Risk Assessment of Patients with Myeloproliferative Neoplasms

Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are clonal disorders of a hematopoietic stem cell, characterized by an abnormal proliferation of largely mature cells driven by mutations in JAK2, CALR, and MPL. All these mutations lead to a constitutive activation of the JAK-STAT signaling, which represents a target for therapy. Beyond driver ones, most patients, especially with myelofibrosis, harbor mutations in an array of "myeloid neoplasm-associated" genes that encode for proteins involved in chromatin modification and DNA methylation, RNA splicing, transcription regulation, and oncogenes. These additional mutations often arise in the context of clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP). The extensive characterization of the pathologic genome associated with MPN highlighted selected driver and non-driver mutations for their clinical informativeness. First, driver mutations are enlisted in the WHO classification as major diagnostic criteria and may be used for monitoring of residual disease after transplantation and response to treatment. Second, mutation profile can be used, eventually in combination with cytogenetic, histopathologic, hematologic, and clinical variables, to risk stratify patients regarding thrombosis, overall survival, and rate of transformation to secondary leukemia. This review outlines the molecular landscape of MPN and critically interprets current information for their potential impact on patient management.

Allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis: a real-life perspective

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal stem cell neoplasm with heterogeneous clinical phenotypes and well-established molecular drivers. Allogeneic haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) offers an important curative treatment option for primary MF and post-essential thrombocythaemia/polycythaemia vera MF or secondary MF. With a disease course that varies from indolent to highly progressive, we are now able to stratify risk of mortality through various tools including patient-related clinical characteristics as well as molecular genetic profile. Owing to the high risk of mortality and morbidity associated with HSCT for patients with myelofibrosis, it is important to improve patient selection for transplant. Our primary goal is to comprehensively define our understanding of current practices including the role of Janus Kinase (JAK) inhibitors, to present the data behind transplantation before and after leukaemic transformation, and to introduce novel personalization of MF treatment with a proposed clinical-molecular prognostic model to help elucidate a timepoint optimal for consideration of HSCT.

Impact of Mutational Profile on the Management of Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: A Short Review of the Emerging Data

Philadelphia-chromosome negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are a heterogeneous group of clonal hematopoietic stem cell disorders characterized by an increased risk of thrombosis and progression to acute myeloid leukemia. MPN are associated with driver mutations in JAK2, CALR and MPL which are crucial for the diagnosis and lead to a constitutive activation of the JAK-STAT signaling, independent of cytokine regulation. Moreover, most patients have concomitant mutations in genes involved in DNA methylation, chromatin modification, messenger RNA splicing, transcription regulation and signal transduction. These additional mutations may arise before, in the context of clonal hematopoiesis of indeterminate potential (CHIP), or after the acquisition of the driver mutation. The clinical phenotype of MPN results from complex interactions between mutations and host factors. The increased application of next-generation sequencing (NGS) techniques to a large series of patients with MPN has expanded the knowledge of mutational landscape and contributed to define the clinical significance of mutations. This molecular information is being increasingly used to refine diagnosis, risk stratification, monitoring of residual disease and response to treatment. ASXL1, SRSF2, EZH2, IDH1/IDH2 and U2AF1 mutations are associated with a more advanced disease and reduced overall survival in primary myelofibrosis (PMF), whereas spliceosome mutations in Polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) adversely affect both overall (SF3B1, SRSF2 in ET and SRSF2 in PV) and myelofibrosis-free (U2AF1, SF3B1 in ET) survival. This review discusses current knowledge of the molecular landscape of MPN, and how the availability of those molecular information may impact patient management.

Risk factors for progression to blast phase and outcome in 589 patients with myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib: Real-world data

The impact of ruxolitinib therapy on evolution to blast phase (BP) in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) is still uncertain. In 589 MF patients treated with ruxolitinib, we investigated incidence and risk factors for BP and we described outcome according to disease characteristics and treatment strategy. After a median follow-up from ruxolitinib start of 3 years (range 0.1-7.6), 65 (11%) patients transformed to BP during (93.8%) or after treatment. BP incidence rate was 3.7 per 100 patient-years, comparably in primary and secondary MF (PMF/SMF) but significantly lower in intermediate-1 risk patients (2.3 vs 5.6 per 100 patient-years in intermediate-2/high-risk patients, P < .001). In PMF and SMF cohorts, previous interferon therapy seemed to correlate with a lower probability of BP (HR 0.13, P = .001 and HR 0.22, P = .02, respectively). In SMF, also platelet count <150 × 10⁹ /l (HR 2.4, P = .03) and peripheral blasts ≥3% (HR 3.3, P = .004) were significantly associated with higher risk of BP. High-risk category according to dynamic International Prognostic Score System (DIPSS) and myelofibrosis secondary to PV and ET Collaboration Prognostic Model (MYSEC-PM predicted BP in patients with PMF and SMF, respectively. Median survival after BP was 0.2 (95% CI: 0.1-0.3) years. Therapy for BP included hypomethylating agents (12.3%), induction chemotherapy (9.2%), allogeneic transplant (6.2%) or supportive care (72.3%). Patients treated with supportive therapy had a median survival of 6 weeks, while 73% of the few transplanted patients were alive at a median follow-up of 2 years. Progression to BP occurs in a significant fraction of ruxolitinib-treated patients and is associated with DIPSS and MYSEC-PM risk in PMF and SMF, respectively.

Mutation landscape in patients with myelofibrosis receiving ruxolitinib or hydroxyurea

Refractoriness to ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) was associated with clonal evolution; however, whether genetic instability is promoted by ruxolitinib remains unsettled. We evaluated the mutation landscape in 71 MF patients receiving ruxolitinib (n = 46) and hydroxyurea (n = 25) and correlated with response. A spleen volume response (SVR) was obtained in 57% and 12%, respectively. Highly heterogenous patterns of mutation acquisition/loss and/or changes of variant allele frequency (VAF) were observed in the 2 patient groups without remarkable differences. In patients receiving ruxolitinib, driver mutation type and high-molecular risk profile (HMR) at baseline did not impact on response rate, while HMR and sole ASXL1 mutations predicted for SVR loss at 3 years. In patients with SVR, a decrease of ≥ 20% of JAK2V617F VAF predicted for SVR duration. VAF increase of non-driver mutations and clonal progression at follow-up correlated with SVR loss and treatment discontinuation, and clonal progression also predicted for shorter survival. These data indicate that (i) ruxolitinib does not appreciably promote clonal evolution compared with hydroxyurea, (ii) VAF increase of pre-existing and/or (ii) acquisition of new mutations while on treatment correlated with higher rate of discontinuation and/or death, and (iv) reduction of JAK2V617F VAF associated with SVR duration.