The European Leukemia Net (ELN) guidelines for treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) connect heterogeneous MDS subgroups with a number of therapeutic options ranging from best supportive care to allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). However, it is currently unknown whether adherence to guideline recommendations translates into improved survival. The sizeable database of the Duesseldorf MDS Registry allowed us to address this question. We first performed a retrospective analysis including 1698 patients (cohort 1) to whom we retrospectively applied the ELN guidelines. We compared patients treated according to the guidelines with patients who deviated from it, either because they received a certain treatment though it was not recommended or because they did not receive that treatment despite being eligible. We also performed a prospective study with 381 patients (cohort 2) who were seen in our department and received guideline-based expert advice. Again, we compared the impact of subsequent guideline-adherent versus non-adherent treatment. For the majority of treatment options (best supportive care, lenalidomide, hypomethylating agents, low-dose chemotherapy, and intensive chemotherapy), we found that adherence to the ELN guidelines did not improve survival in cohort 1. The same was true when patient management was prospectively enhanced through guideline-based treatment advice given by MDS experts (cohort 2). The only exceptions were alloSCT and iron chelation (ICT). Patients receiving ICT and alloSCT as recommended fared significantly better than those who were eligible but received other treatment. Our analysis underscores the limited survival impact of most MDS therapies and suggests to pursue alloSCT in all suitable candidates.
Prognostic stratification in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) relies on a number of key factors. Combining such patient-related and disease-related prognostic parameters into useful assessment tools remains a challenge. The most widely used scoring systems include the international prognostic scoring system (IPSS), the revised IPSS (IPSS-R), the World Health Organization (WHO) Prognostic Scoring System (WPSS), and the new molecular IPSS (IPSS-M). Similar to the IPSS-R and the IPSS-M, the chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) prognostic scoring system (CPSS) and the CPSS molecular (CPSS-mol) are powerful and reliable prognostic tools that help to assess the individual prognosis of patients with CMML. The well-established prognostic assessment of MDS and CMML may be further augmented by additional disease-related parameters, such as somatic mutations, or patient-related factors, such as comorbidities. In this article, we briefly describe useful prognostic scoring systems for myelodysplastic syndromes and identify some open questions that require further investigation.
The heterogeneous group of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) needs an individualized and patient-tailored therapeutic approach. Consensus-based guidelines for diagnosis and treatment provide a basis for clinical decision making. MDS guidelines are issued by expert panels. Our main objective was to examine how guidelines influence patients’ adherence to expert recommendations and how they ensure healthcare quality. To approach this question, we reviewed the most common guidelines for diagnosing and treating MDS in adult patients. Furthermore, we critically looked at quality indicators for everyday practice and studied adherence in an everyday outpatient setting. Finally, we also paid close attention to patient-reported outcome measures and studied how they are used as endpoints in clinical trials. We can conclude that the combination of evidence-based diagnostic tools, standardized treatment recommendations, and patient-centered shared decision making will eventually lead to a healthcare standard that will significantly improve outcomes in adult patients with MDS.
The prognostic impact of monocytosis has not yet been determined in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). We examined absolute monocyte counts in the peripheral blood at the time of diagnosis in 1949 patients with a bone marrow blast count < 5%, a condition we call MDS < EB1 (MDS with a blast percentage lower than that of MDS with excess blasts 1, according to the WHO classification). Monocytosis (> 600/µl) was associated with higher median hemoglobin, WBC, and ANC, and more favorable karyotype (p = .001). Nevertheless, monocytosis was associated with shorter overall survival (OS) (108 vs. 126 months, p = .002) and earlier transformation into AML (p < .001). In patients with sideroblastic phenotype, the percentage of ring sideroblasts significantly correlated with the monocyte count (p = .005), and OS was significantly shorter when monocytosis was documented (88 vs. 132 months, p = .004). The survival disadvantage of patients with MDS < EB1 and peripheral blood monocytosis suggests that these patients suffer from a CMML-like disease. Even though they are generally classified as MDS with persistent monocytosis, such patients should be considered candidates for therapeutic options employed in CMML.
Introduction The effect of adherence to treatment guidelines has not yet been evaluated in myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). Based on the large Düsseldorf MDS Registry, we explored adherence to European LeukemiaNet (ELN) guidelines as well as MDS expert recommendations in clinical routine. Methods In a preliminary retrospective analysis of 1658 patients documented in the Düsseldorf MDS registry, we reviewed if treatment was in accordance with the published ELN guidelines from 2014. The following treatments were considered: erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESA), iron chelation, Lenalidomide, hypomethylating agents (HMA), intensive chemotherapy, and allogeneic stem cell transplantation (alloSCT). Since patients were diagnosed between 1982 and 2018, clinical decision-making could not be exclusively based on current guidelines. Therefore, we also performed a prospective analysis of 381 patients who received patient-tailored treatment recommendations, considering, IPSS-R, MDS-CI, HCT-CI, distance to our center, and ELN guidelines, with special attention to the above-mentioned treatment options. In addition, we conducted a matched-pair analysis, comparing patients who received a certain treatment with patients who, though eligible, did not receive it. Information regarding adherence to treatment recommendations was obtained by searching medical files and contacting primary care physicians. Probability of survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results The retrospective cohort was followed for a median of 22 months (1-500 months). Patients treated in accordance with the ELN guideline did not gain a significant survival benefit in the subgroups treated with ESA, iron chelation, Lenalidomide, HMA, and intensive chemotherapy, compared to patients who were eligible for the respective treatment but did not receive it. Solely the group of patients undergoing alloSCT derived a significant survival benefit compared to patients not receiving alloSCT despite qualifying for this treatment according to ELN criteria (30 vs 18 months, p=0.011, 95% CI 16.86; 25.14, fig. 1). The prospective cohort was followed for a median of 14 months (1-195 months). A median of four months elapsed before treatment was started. Non-adherence to patient-tailored therapeutic recommendations was found in 33% of the patients. The proportion of non-adherence was higher for intensive chemotherapy (47%) and lowest for patients receiving supportive treatment (13%) like ESA and chelation therapy. In the prospective group, the matched-pair study showed again that patients receiving ESA, iron chelation, Lenalidomide, HMA or intensive chemotherapy did not gain a significant survival benefit from adherence to the respective treatment recommendations. Again, survival only differed between patients adhering to and patients not adhering to a recommendation for alloSCT (median survival of 74 vs 28 months; 95% CI 7.5; 48.5, p=0.015). Conclusions According to current ELN guidelines, 33% of patients did not receive the treatment they were eligible for. Non-adherence to patient-tailored treatment recommendations from our tertiary referral center was found in 33% of the patients. Based on our two patient cohorts, supportive care regimens, Lenalidomide, HMA, as well as intensive chemotherapy do not appear to improve overall survival, whereas allogeneic stem cell transplantation provided a significant survival benefit in both groups. In summary, while adherence to MDS treatment guidelines and expert recommendations may influence survival in some of the patients, the overall effect appears to be limited, owing to the limited efficacy of the available treatment options, with the notable exception of alloSCT. However, we cannot exclude that adherence to treatment recommendations has an effect on other relevant outcomes such as quality of life or frequency of hospitalisations due to infections, bleeding and cardiovascular events. Finally, a systematic and standardized assessment of guideline-adherence, reasons for non-adherence, and impact on relevant outcomes would be desirable because it would support us in monitoring the quality of care of MDS patients and would allow comparisons to be made between different health economic environments. Disclosures Nachtkamp: Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Celgene: Other: Travel Support. Schroeder:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Kobbe:Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Neovii: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Abbvie: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Roche: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Biotest: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel support, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Jazz: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Medac: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; MSD: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Travel support. Kündgen:Otsuka: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Novartis: Honoraria. Kaivers:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel Support. Rautenberg:Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Other: Travel Support; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support. Gattermann:Novartis: Honoraria; Alexion: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Bonadies:Novartis: Other: financial support for travel, Research Funding; Roche: Other: financial support for travel, Research Funding; Amgen: Other: financial support for travel; Celgene: Other: financial support for travel, Research Funding; Sanofi Genzyme: Other: financial support for travel; Janssen: Other: financial support for travel. Germing:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria.
Patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and nucleophosmin 1 gene mutations (NPM1mut) show a favorable prognosis with chemotherapy (CT) in the absence of negative prognostic genetic abnormalities. Between 2008 and 2021 64 patients with NPM1mutAML received alloHSCT because of additional adverse prognostic factors (1st line), inadequate response to or relapse during or after CT (2nd line). To expand the evidence in alloTX in NPM1mut AML, clinical and molecular data were retrospectively analyzed with respect to pre-transplant strategies and outcome. Patients with minimal residual disease negative (MRD−) CR at transplant had better 2-y-PFS and 2-y-OS (77% and 88%) than patients with minimal residual disease positive (MRD+) CR (41% and 71%) or patients with active disease (AD) at transplant (20% and 52%). The 2nd line patients with relapse after completing CT responded well to high dose cytarabine based salvage chemotherapy (salvage CT) in contrast to patients relapsing while still on CT (90% vs 20%, P = 0.0170). 2-y-PFS and 2-y-OS was 86% in patients who achieved a 2nd MRD− CR pre alloHSCT. Outcome in NPM1mutAML depends on disease burden at alloHSCT. Time and type of relapse in relation to CT are predictive for response to salvage CT.
The WHO-category Myelodysplastic/Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MDS/MPNs) recognizes a unique group of clonal myeloid malignancies exhibiting overlapping features of myelodysplastic as well as myeloproliferative neoplasms. The group consists of chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML), atypical chronic myeloid leukemia, BCR-ABL1-negative (aCML), juvenile myelomonocytic leukemia (JMML), myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasm with ringed sideroblasts and thrombocytosis (MDS/MPN-RS-T), and myelodysplastic/myeloproliferative neoplasms, unclassifiable (MDS/MPN-U). The most frequent entity in this category is CMML, while all other diseases are extremely rare. Thus, only very limited data on the epidemiology of these subgroups exists. An appropriate diagnosis and classification can be challenging since the diagnosis is still largely based on morphologic criteria and myelodysplastic as well as myeloproliferative features can be found in various occurrences. The diseases in this category share several features that are common in this specific WHO-category, but also exhibit specific traits for each disease. This review summarizes published data on epidemiological features and offers a brief overview of the main diagnostic criteria and clinical characteristics of the five MDS/MPN subgroups.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.