Explore the vast range of titles available.

AbstractInternational collaborations over the years have produced a series of prognostic models for primary myelofibrosis (PMF), including the recently unveiled mutation-enhanced international prognostic scoring systems for transplant-age patients (MIPSS70 and MIPSS70-plus). In the current study, we considered the feasibility of a genetically inspired prognostic scoring system (GIPSS) that is exclusively based on genetic markers. Among 641 cytogenetically annotated patients with PMF and informative for previously recognized adverse mutations, multivariable analysis identified “VHR” karyotype, “unfavorable” karyotype, absence of type 1/like CALR mutation and presence of ASXL1, SRSF2, or U2AF1Q157 mutation, as inter-independent predictors of inferior survival; the respective HRs (95% CI) were 3.1 (2.1–4.3), 2.1 (1.6–2.7), 2.1 (1.6–2.9), 1.8 (1.5–2.3), 2.4 (1.9–3.2), and 2.4 (1.7–3.3). Based on HR-weighted risk points, a four-tiered GIPSS model was devised: low (zero points; n = 58), intermediate-1 (1 point; n = 260), intermediate-2 (2 points; n = 192), and high (≥3 points; n = 131); the respective median (5-year) survivals were 26.4 (94%), 8.0 (73%), 4.2 (40%), and 2 (14%) years; the model was internally validated by bootstrapping and its predictive accuracy was shown to be comparable to that of MIPSS70-plus. GIPPS offers a low-complexity prognostic tool for PMF that is solely dependent on genetic risk factors and, thus, forward-looking in its essence.

Current cytogenetic risk stratification in primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is two-tiered: ‘favorable’ and ‘unfavorable’. Recent studies have suggested prognostic heterogeneity within the unfavorable risk category. In 1002 consecutive patients, we performed stepwise analysis of impact on survival from individual and prognostically ordered cytogenetic abnormalities, leading to a revised three-tiered risk model: ‘very high risk (VHR)’—single/multiple abnormalities of −7, i(17q), inv(3)/3q21, 12p−/12p11.2, 11q−/11q23, or other autosomal trisomies not including + 8/ + 9 (e.g., +21, +19); ‘favorable’—normal karyotype or sole abnormalities of 13q−, +9, 20q−, chromosome 1 translocation/duplication or sex chromosome abnormality including -Y; ‘unfavorable’—all other abnormalities. Median survivals for VHR (n = 75), unfavorable (n = 190) and favorable (n = 737) risk categories were 1.2 (HR 3.8, 95% CI 2.9–4.9), 2.9 (HR 1.7, 95% CI 1.4–2.0) and 4.4 years and survival impact was independent of clinically derived prognostic systems, driver and ASXL1/SRSF2 mutations. The revised model was also effective in predicting leukemic transformation: HRs (95% CI) were 4.4 (2.0–9.4) for VHR and 2.0 (1.2–3.4) for unfavorable. The impact of driver mutations on survival was confined to favorable and that of ASXL1/SRSF2 mutations to favorable/unfavorable cytogenetic risk categories. The current study clarifies the prognostic hierarchy of genetic risk factors in PMF and provides a more refined three-tiered cytogenetic risk model.

A total of 410 patients with blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN-BP) were retrospectively reviewed: 248 from the Mayo Clinic and 162 from Italy. Median survival was 3.6 months, with no improvement over the last 15 years. Multivariable analysis performed on the Mayo cohort identified high risk karyotype, platelet count < 100 × 109/L, age > 65 years and transfusion need as independent risk factors for survival. Also in the Mayo cohort, intensive chemotherapy resulted in complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete count recovery (CRi) rates of 35 and 24%, respectively; treatment-specified 3-year/5-year survival rates were 32/10% for patients receiving allogeneic stem cell transplant (AlloSCT) (n = 24), 19/13% for patients achieving CR/CRi but were not transplanted (n = 24), and 1/1% in the absence of both AlloSCT and CR/CRi (n = 200) (p < 0.01). The survival impact of AlloSCT (HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.1–0.3), CR/CRi without AlloSCT (HR 0.3, 95% CI 0.2–0.5), high risk karyotype (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.2) and platelet count < 100 × 109/L (HR 1.6, 95% CI 1.1–2.2) were confirmed to be inter-independent. Similar observations were made in the Italian cohort. The current study identifies the setting for improved short-term survival in MPN-BP, but also highlights the limited value of current therapy, including AlloSCT, in securing long-term survival.

Maintenance therapy with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) has changed the treatment paradigm of metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC). The JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial established avelumab, one of several ICIs in use today, as a life-prolonging maintenance therapy for patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. Platinum-based chemotherapy is most often used in the first-line treatment of mUC, and while response rates approach about 50%, disease control is usually short-lived upon completion of the standard three to six cycles of chemotherapy. Much progress has been made in recent years in the second-line space and beyond with the use of ICIs, antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs), and tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in eligible patients at the time of disease progression post-platinum-based chemotherapy. However, many patients with progressive mUC after first-line chemotherapy suffer from rapid progression of disease, treatment toxicity with subsequent lines of therapy, and a limited life expectancy. Until the results of the JAVELIN Bladder 100 trial were presented in 2020, there were no maintenance strategies proven to be beneficial over best supportive care after disease control is achieved with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. To date, standard of care frontline treatment of metastatic urothelial cancer remains to be four to six cycles of platinum-based chemotherapy followed by maintenance avelumab. This review summarizes the current evidence available on maintenance therapies in mUC, as well as several highly anticipated clinical trials that we hope will result in further progress in the management of this aggressive cancer and improve patient outcomes.

Among 1306 patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF), we sought to identify risk factors that predicted leukemic transformation (LT) in the first 5 years of disease and also over the course of the disease. 149 (11%) LT were documented; patients who subsequently developed LT (n = 149), compared to those who remained in chronic phase disease (n = 1,157), were more likely to be males (p = 0.02) and display higher circulating blasts (p = 0.03), ASXL1 (p = 0.01), SRSF2 (p = 0.001) and IDH1 (p = 0.02) mutations. Logistic regression analysis identified IDH1, ASXL1 and SRSF2 mutations, very high-risk karyotype, age > 70 years, male sex, circulating blasts ≥ 3%, presence of moderate or severe anemia and constitutional symptoms, as predictors of LT in the first 5 years of diagnosis. Time-to-event Cox analysis confirmed LT prediction for IDH1 mutation (HR 4.3), circulating blasts ≥ 3% (HR 3.3), SRSF2 mutation (HR 3.0), age > 70 years (HR 2.1), ASXL1 mutation (HR 2.0) and presence of moderate or severe anemia (HR 1.9). HR-based risk point allocation resulted in a three-tiered LT risk model: high-risk (LT incidence 57%; HR 39.3, 95% CI 10.8–114), intermediate-risk (LT incidence 17%; HR 4.1, 95% CI 2.4–7.3) and low-risk (LT incidence 8%). The current study provides a highly discriminating LT predictive model for PMF.

Approximately a third of patients diagnosed with kidney cancer in the United States present with advanced disease and those who present with distant metastases historically had dismal 5-year relative survival. However, over the last several years, advancements have led to improved life expectancy and patient outcomes in those who develop advanced renal cell carcinoma. Metastatic clear cell renal cell carcinoma (mccRCC) treatment has rapidly evolved with multiple drug approvals since 2006. Moreover, multiple combination regimens including a vascular endothelial growth factor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (VEGF-TKI) plus immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) and the combination of ipilimumab plus nivolumab have supplanted first-line VEGF-TKI monotherapy. Thus, the insights we gained from prospective randomized controlled trials focusing on systemic therapy beyond first-line therapy in mRCC patients treated in the TKI monotherapy era quickly became less relevant with the adoption of contemporary first-line combination regimens. Herein, we will review contemporary first- and second-line therapies for mccRCC, as well as highly anticipated clinical trials looking into novel regimens beyond first-line therapy in patients who have received combination therapy.

To document the Mayo Clinic decades-long experience with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) and provide mature risk-stratified survival data and disease complication estimates. All Mayo Clinic patients with World Health Organization–defined MPNs constituted the core study group and included those with polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). A total of 3023 consecutive patients (median age, 62 years; range, 18-96 years) were considered: 665 PV, 1076 ET, and 1282 PMF. From October 27, 1967, through December 29, 2017, 1631 deaths (54%), 183 leukemic transformations (6%), 244 fibrotic progressions (14%), and 516 thrombotic events (17%) were recorded. Median overall survival (OS) was 18 years for ET, 15 years for PV, and 4.4 years for PMF (P<.05 for all intergroup comparisons). Inferior survival was documented in patients with ET diagnosed more recently (post-1990) (P<.001), whereas survival data were time independent in PV and PMF. After conventional risk stratification, OS in low-risk ET and low-risk PV were superimposed (P=.89) but each differed significantly from that of age- and sex-matched controls (P<.001). Leukemia-free survival was similar for ET and PV (P=.22) and significantly worse with PMF (P<.001). Compared with ET, PV was associated with higher risk of fibrotic progression (P<.001). Thrombosis risk after diagnosis was highest in PV and lowest in PMF (P=.002 for PV vs ET; P=.56 for ET vs PMF; and P=.001 for PV vs PMF). This study provides the most mature survival and outcomes data in MPNs and highlights MPN subgroup risk categorization as key in appraising disease natural history. The OS was only marginally better in ET compared with PV, and PV displayed a higher risk of thrombosis and fibrotic progression.

To develop a new risk model for primary myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) that integrates information on mutations, karyotype, and clinical variables. Patients with World Health Organization–defined primary MDS seen at Mayo Clinic (MC) from December 28, 1994, through December 19, 2017, constituted the core study group. The National Taiwan University Hospital (NTUH) provided the validation cohort. Model performance, compared with the revised International Prognostic Scoring System, was assessed by Akaike information criterion and area under the curve estimates. The study group consisted of 685 molecularly annotated patients from MC (357) and NTUH (328). Multivariate analysis of the MC cohort identified monosomal karyotype (hazard ratio [HR], 5.2; 95% CI, 3.1-8.6), “non-MK abnormalities other than single/double del(5q)” (HR, 1.8; 95% CI, 1.3-2.6), RUNX1 (HR, 2.0; 95% CI, 1.2-3.1) and ASXL1 (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2-2.3) mutations, absence of SF3B1 mutations (HR, 1.6; 95% CI, 1.1-2.4), age greater than 70 years (HR, 2.2; 95% CI, 1.6-3.1), hemoglobin level less than 8 g/dL in women or less than 9 g/dL in men (HR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.7-3.1), platelet count less than 75 × 109/L (HR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.1-2.1), and 10% or more bone marrow blasts (HR, 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1-2.8) as predictors of inferior overall survival. Based on HR-weighted risk scores, a 4-tiered Mayo alliance prognostic model for MDS was devised: low (89 patients), intermediate-1 (104), intermediate-2 (95), and high (69); respective median survivals (5-year overall survival rates) were 85 (73%), 42 (34%), 22 (7%), and 9 months (0%). The Mayo alliance model was subsequently validated by using the external NTUH cohort and, compared with the revised International Prognostic Scoring System, displayed favorable Akaike information criterion (1865 vs 1943) and area under the curve (0.87 vs 0.76) values. We propose a simple and contemporary risk model for MDS that is based on a limited set of genetic and clinical variables.