Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
Type of Medium
Language
Subjects(RVK)
  • 1
    In: JAMA Oncology, American Medical Association (AMA), Vol. 8, No. 3 ( 2022-03-01), p. 345-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2374-2437
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Medical Association (AMA)
    Publication Date: 2022
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Multiple Sclerosis and Related Disorders, Elsevier BV, Vol. 47 ( 2021-01), p. 102641-
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 2211-0348
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2021
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2645330-7
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 3
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 128, No. 22 ( 2016-12-02), p. 995-995
    Abstract: Introduction: Risk-adapted therapy in curable hematologic malignancies is commonly applied: low-risk patients (pts) may be cured with less intensive treatment, avoiding excessive toxicity, whereas high-riskpts require more intensive and toxic regimens. In multiple myeloma (MM), this model may not apply, since the disease is incurable. In recent years, there has been a marked improvement in patient outcome, due to the introduction of novel agents and optimized treatment strategies, including the use of transplant and maintenance. A better evaluation ofpts prognosis based on the new revised international staging system (R-ISS) has been also introduced in clinical practice. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the impact of treatment intensification (specifically autologous stem cell transplantation [ASCT] and maintenance) inpts with different prognostic features. Methods: Data from 3 phase III randomized trials in newly diagnosed MMpts (RV-MM-209; EMN441; GIMEMA-MM0305) were pooled together and analyzed. Baseline patient risk assessment was estimated using R-ISS. We evaluated: 1) the impact of treatment intensification with high-dose therapy followed by ASCTvs no-ASCT inpts with R-ISS Stage Ivs Stage II/III; 2) the impact of treatment intensification with maintenancevs no maintenance inpts with R-ISS Stage Ivs Stage II/III. RV-MM-209 and EMN441 studies randomizedpts to ASCTvs no-ASCT; allpts in the GIMEMA-MM0305 trial did not receive ASCT and were excluded from the first comparison; RV-MM-209 and GIMEMA-MM0305 studies randomizedpts to maintenance or no maintenance after induction/consolidation; allpts in the EMN441 trial received maintenance and were excluded from the second comparison. We evaluated progression free survival-1 (PFS1), PFS2 and overall survival (OS). Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios (HRs). To account for potential confounders, the comparisons between ASCTvs no-ASCT and maintenancevs no maintenance were adjusted for the trial effect and the main prognostic features. Results: Overall, 1302 pts were enrolled in the 3 trials. Median follow-up was 4 years.Comparison ASCTvs no-ASCT: 791pts were enrolled in the 2 trials, 529 were eligible for the ASCTvs no ASCT comparison. R-ISS Stage data were available for 419 pts. There was an overall advantage for ASCTvs no-ASCT in PFS1 (0.53; p 〈 0.001), PFS2 (HR 0.53; p 〈 0.001) and OS (HR 0.51; p 〈 0.001). The 4-year PFS1 was 53% inpts with R-ISS Stage I randomized to ASCT, 35% inpts with R-ISS Stage II/III randomized to ASCT, 36% inpts with R-ISS Stage I randomized to no-ASCT and 19% in those with R-ISS Stage II/III randomized to no-ASCT (p 〈 0.001); the 4-year PFS2 was 83%, 60%, 71% and 43% in the 4 subgroups, respectively (p 〈 0.001) (Figure 1A, B); the4-year OS was 95%, 75%, 88% and 61%(p 〈 0.001). Comparison maintenancevs no maintenance: 913pts were enrolled in the 2 trials, 550 could be eligible for maintenance. R-ISS data were available in 403 pts. Maintenance significantly improved PFS (HR 0.54, p 〈 0.001), PFS2 (HR 0.52, p 〈 0.001) and OS (HR 0.69, p=0.027) in comparison with no maintenance. The 4-year PFS was 48% forpts with R-ISS Stage-I assigned to maintenance, 37% forpts with R-ISS Stage II/III assigned to maintenance, 25% forpts with R-ISS Stage-I assigned to no maintenance and 18% forpts with R-ISS Stage II/III assigned to no maintenance (p 〈 0.001); the 4-year PFS2 was 73%, 66%, 59% and 43% in the 4 subgroups, respectively (p 〈 0.001) (Figure 1C, D); the 4-year OS was 80%, 73%, 77% and 63% (p 〈 0.001). Conclusions: Both ASCT and maintenance improved PFS1, PFS2 and OS in MM pts. The highest survival was reported in patients with R-ISS Stage I receiving ASCT and/or maintenance. Low-riskpts (R-ISS Stage I) not undergoing intensification with ASCT or maintenance lose their prognostic advantage over high-risk patients receiving the same intensification. Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Gay: Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board; Mundipharma: Other: Advisory Board. Hajek:Novartis: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy; BMS: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Bringhen:Mundipharma: Other: Advisory Board; Karyopharm: Other: Advisory Board; BMS: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Amgen: Other: Advisory Board; Celgene: Honoraria. Gaidano:Gilead: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Morphosys: Consultancy, Honoraria; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Caravita:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Cavo:Millennium: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Foà:Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Ariad: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Genetech: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Patriarca:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Advisory board; Mundipharma: Other: Advisory board; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory board; MSD: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Ria:Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Janssen-Cilag: Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau; CSL Behring: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Binding Site: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau; BMS: Speakers Bureau. Palumbo:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Takeda: Employment, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Mundipharma: Research Funding; SANOFI: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbivie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; CELGENE: Honoraria, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2016
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 4
    In: European Journal of Cancer, Elsevier BV, Vol. 82 ( 2017-09), p. 237-246
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0959-8049
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Elsevier BV
    Publication Date: 2017
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1120460-6
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468190-0
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 82061-1
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 5
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 126, No. 23 ( 2015-12-03), p. 392-392
    Abstract: Introduction. High-dose melphalan plus autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) is the standard approach in newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible myeloma patients. We compared consolidation with high-dose melphalan plus ASCT versus cyclophosphamide-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (CRD), and maintenance with lenalidomide-prednisone (RP) versus lenalidomide alone (R). Methods. This is an open-label, randomized, phase 3 study. We enrolled newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible myeloma patients aged ≤65 years. Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, we randomized patients to consolidation with melphalan 200 mg/m2 (MEL200) followed by ASCT or CRD (cyclophosphamide 300 mg/m2 days 1, 8, 15; dexamethasone 40 mg days 1, 8, 15, 22; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21); and to maintenance with RP (lenalidomide 10 mg days 1-21; prednisone 50 mg every other day) or R alone. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results. 389 patients were enrolled between July 6, 2009 and May 6, 2011. Median follow-up was 54.5 months. MEL200 significantly increased PFS (median PFS from the start of consolidation: 43.3 versus 28.6 months; HR 0.40, P 〈 0.001) and overall survival (OS; 4-year: 86% versus 73%; HR 0.42, P=0.004) compared with CRD. Median PFS from the start of maintenance was 37.5 months with RP versus 28.5 months with R maintenance (HR 0.84, P=0.336); 3-year OS was 83% with RP versus 88% with R maintenance (HR 1.53, P=0.210). Grade 3-4 hematologic toxicities (84% versus 26%, P 〈 0.001), gastrointestinal toxicities (20% versus 5%, P 〈 0.001) and infections (19% versus 6%, P=0.002) were higher with MEL200 than with CRD. No significant difference in adverse events (AEs) between RP and R was noticed. The most frequent grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were neutropenia (8% with RP versus 13% with R; P=0.193), infections (8% with RP versus 5% with R; P=0.417), systemic AEs (6% vs 2%; P=0.174) and vascular AEs (4% with RP versus 2% with R; P=0.449). In the RP arm, lenalidomide dose-reduction for AEs was required in 9% of patients; prednisone dose-reduction was required in 36% of patients (median time to prednisone dose-reduction: 4 months); 5% discontinued treatment for toxicity and 3% stopped treatment after developing a second primary malignancy (SPM). In the R arm, lenalidomide dose-reduction was required in 21% of patients; 8% discontinued lenalidomide for toxicity; 2% stopped treatment after developing a SPM. The median duration of lenalidomide treatment was comparable in the 2 groups. Conclusions. MEL200 significantly prolonged PFS and OS compared with CRD, regardless of maintenance. RP maintenance did not significantly improve PFS and OS compared with R alone. Disclosures Gay: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Use off-label of drugs for the dose and/or schedule and/or association. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Di Raimondo:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene: Honoraria. Caravita:Celgene: Honoraria. Ria:Italfarmaco: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Offidani:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Sanofi, Amgen, Mundipharma: Honoraria. Bringhen:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Novartis: Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy. Patriarca:Janssen-Cilag, Celgene, Merck Sharp & Dohme: Honoraria. Spencer:Celgene: Honoraria. Hajek:Merck Sharp & Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria. Boccadoro:Sanofi: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen-Cilag: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Novartis, Sanofi Aventis: Honoraria; Celgene, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Genmab, Janssen-Cilag, Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2015
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 6
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 120, No. 21 ( 2012-11-16), p. 712-712
    Abstract: Abstract 712 The identification of NOTCH1, SF3B1, MYD88 and BIRC3 genetic lesions in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) prompts a comprehensive and dynamic prognostic algorithm including gene mutations, chromosomal abnormalities, and their changes during clonal evolution. The study utilized both time-fixed (637 newly diagnosed CLL) and time-dependent (257 CLL provided with 524 sequential samples) approaches. Each sample was investigated for TP53, NOTCH1, SF3B1, MYD88, and BIRC3 mutations by Sanger sequencing and for 17p13, 11q22-q23, 13q14 and BIRC3 deletions and +12 by FISH. Del13q14 and +12 distributed in a mutually exclusive fashion (p 〈 0.0001), and identified three main genetic subgroups: cases harboring del13q14, cases harboring +12 and cases lacking both del13q14 and +12. With the sole exception of the expected association between NOTCH1 mutations and +12 CLL (p=0.0014), the prevalence of the other genetic lesions did not differ among molecular subgroups. FISH abnormalities segregated patients in distinct prognostic groups according to Döhner (Fig 1A). Among new genetic lesions, survival analysis confirmed the independent prognostic value of NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 lesions in this study cohort. MYD88 mutations had no prognostic effect (p=0.1728). Recursive partitioning analysis followed by random survival forest validation established the hierarchical order of relevance of the genetic lesions, and created an integrated mutational and cytogenetic (MUCY) model that classified newly diagnosed CLL into four prognostic subgroups (Fig 1B). High risk patients harbored TP53 disruption and/or BIRC3 disruption independent of co-occurring lesions (10-year survival: 29.1%). When the demographic effects of age, sex and year of diagnosis were compensated, the 10-year life expectancy of high risk patients was only 37.7% of that expected in the matched general population (p 〈 0.0001). Intermediate risk patients harbored NOTCH1 and/or SF3B1 mutations and/or del11q22-q23 in the absence of TP53 and BIRC3 abnormalities (10-year OS: 37.1%). The 10-year life expectancy of intermediate risk patients was reduced to 48.5% compared to the matched general population (p 〈 0.0001). The low risk category comprised both patients harboring +12 and patients wild type for all genetic lesions (i.e. normal) (10-year OS: 57.3%), with a 10-year life expectancy of 70.7% compared to the matched general population (p 〈 0.0001). Very low risk patients harbored del13q14 as the sole genetic lesion (10-year OS: 69.3%), with a 10-year life expectancy only slightly (84.2%) and not significantly (p=0.1455) lower than that expected in the matched general population. Multivariate analysis selected the MUCY model as one of the most important independent risk factor of CLL OS (HR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.18–1.60; p 〈 0.0001; 99% bootstrap selection), along with age (HR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04–1.07; p 〈 0.0001; 100% bootstrap selection), Rai stage (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.23-1-51; p 〈 0.0001; 100% bootstrap selection) and unmutated IGHV genes (HR: 1.63; 95% CI: 1.17–2.26; p=0.0039; 92% bootstrap selection). Overall, 21.5% (105/488) low risk patients according to the FISH model (del13q14, normal and +12) were reclassified into high risk genetic subgroups by the MUCY model because of the co-occurrence of NOTCH1 (64/488, 13.1%), SF3B1 (35/488, 7.1%), and TP53 (17/488, 3.4%) mutations or BIRC3 disruption (14/488, 2.8%). Consistently, the inclusion of NOTCH1, SF3B1 and BIRC3 lesions in addition to FISH abnormalities significantly improved the model accuracy of OS prediction (c-index: 0.617 vs c-index: 0.642 p 〈 0.0001). At 10 years from diagnosis, 24.5% CLL of the very low and low risk genetic subgroups developed new TP53, NOTCH1, SF3B1, BIRC3 or del11q22-q23 lesions due to clonal evolution, and therefore switched to a higher risk category of the MUCY model. By time-dependent and landmark analysis, the MUCY model retained a statistically significant impact on CLL OS (HR: 1.52; 95% CI: 1.21–1.90; p=0.0003) at any time from diagnosis and independent of its dynamic changes due to clonal evolution. The MUCY model classifies CLL patients into more precise subgroups, advances our understanding of CLL biology, and improves current prognostic algorithms. These findings have relevant implications for the design of clinical trials aimed at assessing the use of mutational profiling to inform therapeutic decisions based on risk stratification. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2012
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 7
    In: Cancer, Wiley, Vol. 126, No. 6 ( 2020-03-15), p. 1243-1252
    Abstract: In real‐world data from 524 patients who received ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis, the incidence of and risk factors associated with drug discontinuation were investigated along with how reasons for discontinuation, disease phase at discontinuation, and salvage therapies may influence outcomes. At 3 years, higher risk category, lower platelet count, unfavorable karyotype, and transfusion dependency at the start of ruxolitinib were associated with a greater probability of drug discontinuation; and outcomes were significantly better in patients who discontinued in chronic phase versus blast phase and in those who received investigational agents and/or ruxolitinib rechallenge.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0008-543X , 1097-0142
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2020
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1479932-7
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2599218-1
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2594979-2
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1429-1
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 8
    In: Hematological Oncology, Wiley, Vol. 37, No. 4 ( 2019-10), p. 418-423
    Abstract: The 2016 WHO criteria identified early primary myelofibrosis (PMF) as an individual entity with milder clinical features and better outcome compared with overt PMF. Here, we compared early and overt PMF patients treated with ruxolitinib in terms of baseline clinical/laboratory characteristics, response, and toxicity to treatment. We observed that early‐PMF patients achieve better and more stable spleen and symptoms responses, with significantly lower rates of hematological toxicities. No differences in overall and leukemia‐free survival were detected between the two cohorts. The application of 2016 WHO criteria is crucial to identify those PMF patients who deserve a stricter monitoring during treatment.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0278-0232 , 1099-1069
    URL: Issue
    Language: English
    Publisher: Wiley
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2001443-0
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 9
    In: Bone Marrow Transplantation, Springer Science and Business Media LLC, Vol. 54, No. 10 ( 2019-10), p. 1717-1720
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0268-3369 , 1476-5365
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: Springer Science and Business Media LLC
    Publication Date: 2019
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 2004030-1
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 10
    In: Blood, American Society of Hematology, Vol. 132, No. Supplement 1 ( 2018-11-29), p. 3052-3052
    Abstract: Introduction . The 2016 WHO criteria identified early primary myelofibrosis (early-PMF) as an individual entity with different clinical/laboratory presentations and a significantly better outcome compared to overt PMF. No information is available on the therapeutic effects of ruxolitinib (RUX) in the context of each disease separately. Aims . To report the differences between early and overt PMF patients (pts) treated with RUX in terms of baseline clinical/laboratory characteristics, response to treatment and toxicity. Methods . A clinical database was created in 23 European Hematology Centers including retrospective data of 537 MF pts treated with RUX from Jan 2011 to July 2018. Spleen and symptoms response (SR & SyR) to RUX were evaluated according to the 2013 IWG-MRT criteria. Hematologic toxicity and infections were graded according to the WHO scale. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were estimated from diagnosis using the Cox proportional hazards regression model, with adjustment for the dynamic international prognostic score system (DIPSS) and left-truncation. Results . A total of 199 pts had a diagnosis of early (n. 59, 29.7%) or overt (n. 140, 70.3%) PMF confirmed by bone marrow biopsy at RUX start and were included in this analysis. At RUX start, median age was 68.4 yrs (26.5-88.9) and 66.3% of pts had a spleen palpable at ≥10 cm below the left costal margin (LCM) (median spleen length: 12 cm). Median hemoglobin value and total symptoms score (TSS) were 10.5 g/dL and 20 (0-80), respectively. DIPSS distribution was: intermediate-1 (50.5%), intermediate-2 (42.1%), high (7.4%). Molecular status was: JAK2V617F 72.3%, CALR 13.7%, MPLW515K/L 3.1%, triple-negative 5%. Median time from diagnosis to RUX start was 22.4 mos (0.1-394). Compared to overt PMF pts, pts with early PMF started RUX with higher hemoglobin levels (median, 11.6 vs 10.4 g/dl, p=0.01) and lower circulating blast counts (p 〈 0.001), and were more frequently at intermediate-1 DIPSS risk (69.6% vs 42.5%, p 〈 0.001). RUX starting and 12-weeks titrated doses were comparable in the two groups. At 3 and 6 months, 43.1% and 48.9% of early-PMF pts achieved a SR, compared to 27.9% and 31.3% of overt-MF pts (p=0.04 and p=0.04, respectively). The rate of SyR was also higher in early-PMF pts at 3 months (82.5% vs 68.8%, p=0.05) and at 6 months (90.0 vs 73.7, p=0.02). In the first 12 months from RUX start, anemia/thrombocytopenia of all grades occurred in 75.6%/43.1% and 86.3%/60.0% of early and overt PMF pts, respectively (p=0.11 and p=0.03). At 3 months, anemia was more frequent in overt PMF pts (94.7% vs 80.0%, p=0.01), with 32.6% of pts having a grade 3-4 anemia compared to 17.8% in early PMF (p=0.02). The incidence of thrombocytopenia was also higher in overt PMF at 3 (51.5% vs 36.2%, p=0.05) and 6 (52.9% vs 35.8%, p=0.04) months, with only 2.2% and 2.5% of pts having a grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia, respectively. Seventy-five pts had at least one grade ≥2 infectious episode during RUX therapy. Considering death as competing risk, the cumulative risk of infections grade ≥2 was comparable in the two cohorts (p=0.4). Overall, 108 pts discontinued RUX (52.5% and 55.0% of early and overt PMF pts, p=0.7). Evolution into acute leukemia (AL) occurred in 21 pts. After a median follow-up of 23 months, 69 pts died (19 early), specifically because of progression of myelofibrosis (38%), AL (16.9%), infections (11.3%), hemorrhage/thrombosis (12.6%), second neoplasias (8.5%) or transplant-associated toxicity (2.8%), other causes (9.9%). OS (p=0.88) and PFS (p=0.86) were comparable in early and overt PMF pts. Conclusions . This study indicates for the first time that early PMF represents a category of pts that is projected to have better responses and lower toxicities from RUX treatmemt. In the setting of RUX therapy, a WHO-defined diagnosis may contribute to better identify pts who may deserve a strict monitoring during treatment. Disclosures Palandri: Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Palumbo:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abruzzese:BMS: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Ariad: Consultancy. Foà:INCYTE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; GILEAD: Speakers Bureau; JANSSEN: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; ROCHE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; CELTRION: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; ABBVIE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau; AMGEN: Other: ADVISORY BOARD; NOVARTIS: Speakers Bureau; CELGENE: Other: ADVISORY BOARD, Speakers Bureau. Vitolo:Takeda: Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau; Sandoz: Speakers Bureau. Aversa:Basilea: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Merck: Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cuneo:Roche: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau; janssen: Other: advisory board, Speakers Bureau. Di Raimondo:Celgene: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding. Cavo:Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Adaptive Biotechnologies: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Breccia:Incyte: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; BMS: Honoraria.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0006-4971 , 1528-0020
    RVK:
    RVK:
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Society of Hematology
    Publication Date: 2018
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1468538-3
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 80069-7
    Library Location Call Number Volume/Issue/Year Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. Further information can be found on the KOBV privacy pages