Background Patients with cancer are considered highly vulnerable to the recent coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) pandemic. However, there are still few data on COVID‐19 occurring in hematologic patients. Methods One hundred two patients with COVID‐19 symptoms and a nasopharyngeal swab positive for severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 seen at 2 hematologic departments located in Lombardy, Italy, during March 2020 were studied. Risk factors for acquiring COVID‐19 were analyzed by comparisons of patients with COVID‐19 and the standard hematologic population managed at the same institutions in 2019. Thirty‐day survival was compared with the survival of matched uninfected control patients with similar hematologic disorders and nonhematologic patients affected by COVID‐19. Results Male sex was significantly more prevalent in patients with COVID‐19. The infection occurred across all different types of hematologic disease; however, the risk of acquiring a COVID‐19 infection was lower for patients with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms, including chronic myeloid leukemia, and higher for patients with immune‐mediated anemia on immunosuppressive‐related treatments. The 30‐day mortality rate was 39.2%, which was higher than the rates for nonhematologic patients with COVID‐19 (23.5%; P = .02) and uninfected hematologic controls (3%; P < .001). The severity of the respiratory syndrome at presentation and active hematologic treatment were independently associated with a worse prognosis. Neither diagnosis nor disease status affected the prognosis. The worst prognosis was demonstrated among patients on active hematologic treatment and those with more severe respiratory syndrome at COVID‐19 presentation. Conclusions During the COVID‐19 pandemic, patients should be advised to seek medical attention at the earliest signs of dyspnea and/or respiratory infection. Physicians should perform a risk‐benefit analysis to determine the impact of temporarily deferring nonlifesaving treatments versus the risk of adverse outcomes associated with COVID‐19. Lay Summary Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID‐19) infection occurs across all different types of hematologic disease; however, the risk of acquiring it is lower for patients with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms, including chronic myeloid leukemia, and higher for patients with immune‐mediated anemia on immunosuppressive treatment. The 30‐day mortality rate is 39.2%, which is far higher than the rates for both uninfected hematologic controls (3%; P < .001) and nonhematologic patients with COVID‐19 (23.5%; P = .02) despite matching for age, sex, comorbidities, and severity of disease. Variables independently associated with a worse prognosis are the severity of the respiratory syndrome at presentation and any type of active hematologic treatment. Neither diagnosis nor disease status influence the prognosis.

Several papers authored by international experts have proposed recommendations on the management of BCR-ABL1+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Following these recommendations, survival of CML patients has become very close to normal. The next, ambitious, step is to bring as many patients as possible into a condition of treatment-free remission (TFR). The Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell’Adulto (GIMEMA; Italian Group for Hematologic Diseases of the Adult) CML Working Party (WP) has developed a project aimed at selecting the treatment policies that may increase the probability of TFR, taking into account 4 variables: the need for TFR, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the characteristics of leukemia, and the patient. A Delphi-like method was used to reach a consensus among the representatives of 50 centers of the CML WP. A consensus was reached on the assessment of disease risk (EUTOS Long Term Survival [ELTS] score), on the definition of the most appropriate age boundaries for the choice of first-line treatment, on the choice of the TKI for first-line treatment, and on the definition of the responses that do not require a change of the TKI (BCR-ABL1 ≤10% at 3 months, ≤1% at 6 months, ≤0.1% at 12 months, ≤0.01% at 24 months), and of the responses that require a change of the TKI, when the goal is TFR (BCR-ABL1 &gt;10% at 3 and 6 months, &gt;1% at 12 months, and &gt;0.1% at 24 months). These suggestions may help optimize the treatment strategy for TFR.

Treatment‐free remission (TFR) by tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) discontinuation in patients with deep molecular response (DMR) is a paramount goal in the current chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) therapeutic strategy. The best DMR level by real‐time quantitative PCR (RT‐qPCR) for TKI discontinuation is still a matter of debate. To compare the accuracy of digital PCR (dPCR) and RT‐qPCR for BCR‐ABL1 transcript levels detection, 142 CML patients were monitored for a median time of 24 months. Digital PCR detected BCR‐ABL1 transcripts in the RT‐qPCR undetectable cases. The dPCR analysis of the samples, grouped by the MR classes, revealed a significant difference between MR 4.0 and MR 4.5 ( P = 0.0104) or MR 5.0 ( P = 0.0032). The clinical and hematological characteristics of the patients grouped according to DMR classes (MR 4.0 vs MR 4.5‐5.0 ) were superimposable. Conversely, patients with dPCR values <0.468 BCR‐ABL1 copies/µL (as we previously described) showed a longer DMR duration ( P = 0.0220) and mainly belonged to MR 4.5‐5.0 ( P = 0.0442) classes compared to patients with higher dPCR values. Among the 142 patients, 111 (78%) discontinued the TKI treatment; among the 111 patients, 24 (22%) lost the MR 3.0 or MR 4.0 . RT‐qPCR was not able to discriminate patients with higher risk of MR loss after discontinuation ( P = 0.8100). On the contrary, according to dPCR, 12/25 (48%) patients with BCR‐ABL1 values ≥0.468 and 12/86 (14%) patients with BCR‐ABL1 values <0.468 lost DMR in this cohort, respectively ( P = 0.0003). Treatment‐free remission of patients who discontinued TKI with a dPCR <0.468 was significantly higher compared to patients with dPCR ≥ 0.468 (TFR at 2 years 83% vs 52% P = 0.0017, respectively). In conclusion, dPCR resulted in an improved recognition of stable DMR and of candidates to TKI discontinuation.

In patients with Myelofibrosis (MF) treated with ruxolitinib (RUX), the response is unpredictable at therapy start. We retrospectively evaluated the impact of clinical/laboratory factors on responses in 408 patients treated with RUX according to prescribing obligations in 18 Italian Hematology Centers. At 6 months, 114 out of 327 (34.9%) evaluable patients achieved a spleen response. By multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression model, pre-treatment factors negatively correlating with spleen response were: high/intermediate-2 IPSS risk (p=0.024), large splenomegaly (p=0.017), transfusion dependency (p=0.022), platelet count <200×109/l (p=0.028), and a time-interval between MF diagnosis and RUX start >2 years (p=0.048). Also, patients treated with higher (≥10 mg BID) average RUX doses in the first 12 weeks achieved higher response rates (p=0.019). After adjustment for IPSS risk, patients in spleen response at 6 months showed only a trend for better survival compared to non-responders. At 6 months, symptoms response was achieved by 85.5% of 344 evaluable patients; only a higher (>20) Total Symptom Score significantly correlated with lower probability of response (p<0.001). Increased disease severity, a delay in RUX start and titrated doses <10 mg BID were associated with patients achievinglower response rates. An early treatment and higher RUX doses may achieve better therapeutic results.

In chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) patients, tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) may select for drug-resistant BCR-ABL1 kinase domain (KD) mutants. Although Sanger sequencing (SS) is considered the gold standard for BCR-ABL1 KD mutation screening, next-generation sequencing (NGS) has recently been assessed in retrospective studies. We conducted a prospective, multicenter study (NEXT-in-CML) to assess the frequency and clinical relevance of low-level mutations and the feasibility, cost, and turnaround times of NGS-based BCR-ABL1 mutation screening in a routine setting. A series of 236 consecutive CML patients with failure (n = 124) or warning (n = 112) response to TKI therapy were analyzed in parallel by SS and NGS in 1 of 4 reference laboratories. Fifty-one patients (22 failure, 29 warning) who were negative for mutations by SS had low-level mutations detectable by NGS. Moreover, 29 (27 failure, 2 warning) of 60 patients who were positive for mutations by SS showed additional low-level mutations. Thus, mutations undetectable by SS were identified in 80 out of 236 patients (34%), of whom 42 (18% of the total) had low-level mutations somehow relevant for clinical decision making. Prospective monitoring of mutation kinetics demonstrated that TKI-resistant low-level mutations are invariably selected if the patients are not switched to another TKI or if they are switched to a inappropriate TKI or TKI dose. The NEXT-in-CML study provides for the first time robust demonstration of the clinical relevance of low-level mutations, supporting the incorporation of NGS-based BCR-ABL1 KD mutation screening results in the clinical decision algorithms.