Szuber, Natasha

ABSTRACT Survival prediction models in essential thrombocythemia (ET) include the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSET) and the more recently introduced triple‐A (AAA) prognostic score. The latter enlists age and absolute neutrophil (ANC) and lymphocyte (ALC) counts as risk variables. In the current study, a Mayo Clinic discovery cohort of 658 patients with ET was used to identify AAA‐independent risk variables. Accordingly, multivariable analysis‐derived HRs (95% CI) were 15.7 (8.4–29.5) for age > 70 years (8 points); 4.2 (2.3–7.5) for age 50 to 70 years (2 points); 1.8 (1.2–2.5) for ANC ≥ 8 × 10 9 /L (1 point); 1.4 (1.03–1.9) for ALC < 1.7 × 10 9 /L (1 point); 1.8 (1.2–2.6) for absolute monocyte count (AMC) ≥ 0.5 × 10 9 /L (1 point); 1.8 (1.2–2.3) for male sex (1 point); 1.8 (1.3–2.4) for arterial hypertension (1 point); and 1.6 (1.2–2.3) for arterial thrombosis (1 point). HR‐weighted scoring enabled a 4‐tiered risk classification: ultra‐low (0–1 points; N = 94; median survival 42.7 years), low (2–4 points; N = 297; 23 years), intermediate (5 points; N = 66; 17.3 years), and high (6–14 points; N = 201; 10.8 years). Time‐dependent predictive performance at 20/25 years favored AAA + (AUC 0.92/0.91) vs. AAA (0.86/0.86) vs. IPSET (0.81/0.84). The AAA + risk model was subsequently validated by two external cohorts from Israel ( N = 5968) and Italy ( N = 682). In the cohort from Israel, disease‐specific mortality was assessed by comparing observed survival to an age‐ and sex‐matched reference population, which suggested near‐normal life expectancy in ultra‐low risk patients. The current study highlights host‐related factors as the primary determinants of longevity in ET and provides a composite risk score (AAA + ) that is based on complete blood count‐derived parameters and host‐related factors. Predictive performance of the new model was shown to be superior to that of IPSET and AAA.

ABSTRACTOverviewSex and gender have emerged as central modifiers of disease biology, phenotype, and clinical outcomes in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). This review will uniquely highlight issues affecting women with MPN and articulate their relevant determinants.Epidemiology and DiagnosisA higher overall prevalence of MPN has been established in women. The incidence of essential thrombocythemia (ET) predominates, while, conversely, polycythemia vera (PV) and myelofibrosis (MF) are seen in lower frequencies as compared to men. Diagnostic criteria are dictated by sex‐driven physiological variances in hemoglobin and hematocrit levels in PV, mandating separate diagnostic thresholds, respectively: > 16.0 g/dL and > 48% in women vs. > 16.5 and > 49% in men.Genetic Framework and PhenotypeWomen with MPN harbor fewer acquired somatic mutations and a lower frequency of high‐risk mutations than their male counterparts; lower JAK2V617F driver variant allele frequency and attenuated allele burden kinetics have also been reported. Women with MPN are younger at diagnosis than men and, contingent on subtype, display more indolent disease features. Importantly, validated symptom burden assessments consistently disclose higher scores in women vs. men.Thrombosis and OutcomesWomen with MPN have a unique thrombotic diathesis with respect to men, more frequently involving the splanchnic venous system in those ultimately diagnosed with PV. Outcomes data depict female sex as a variable associated with more favorable clinical trajectories, including lower rates of MF/leukemic transformation and secondary cancers, as well as improved overall survival rates vis‐à‐vis men.Life‐Cycle Windows, Pregnancy, and PostpartumPotential challenges at each significant life stage will be addressed: puberty, preconception and fertility, and perimenopause; these include issues surrounding oral contraceptives and hormone use. Prospective studies suggest overall favorable maternal and fetal outcomes with pregnancy in women with MPN. Full details on risks and reported outcomes will be discussed, as well as a risk‐adapted approach to management informed by obstetric and thrombosis history. Recommendations include aspirin 81 mg daily in all patients and cytoreduction with interferon‐α in those with antecedent thrombosis, as well as in low‐risk cases with higher‐risk features (e.g., poorly controlled hematocrit and recurrent fetal loss). Antepartum anticoagulation with low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) is recommended in cases with previous venous thromboembolism.Conclusions and Future DirectionsThis review highlights female sex and gender as critical drivers of MPN incidence, presentation, and natural history. It further outlines the impact and management of MPN as related to unique female reproductive phases. A sex‐informed lens will be required in order to recalibrate current prognostic tools, a requisite to refining patient counselling and clinical decision‐making in line with precision medicine. Moreover, while several mechanisms underpinning sex‐defined discrepancies have been defined, these mandate further prospective study. Finally, sex and gender‐based differences must be weighted in clinical trials with systematized procedures to correct participation imbalances in favor of sex and gender equity.

Abstract With emerging new drugs in myelofibrosis (MF), a robust and harmonized framework for defining the severity of anemia and response to treatment will enhance clinical investigation and facilitate interstudy comparisons. Accordingly, the lead authors on the 2013 edition of the International Working Group–European LeukemiaNet (IWG-ELN) response criteria in MF were summoned to revise their document with the intent to (1) account for gender-specific differences in determining hemoglobin levels for eligibility criteria; (2) revise the definition of transfusion-dependent anemia (TDA) based on current restrictive transfusion practices; and (3) provide a structurally simple and easy to apply response criteria that are sensitive enough to detect efficacy signals (minor response) and also account for major responses. The initial draft of the 2024 IWG-ELN proposed criteria was subsequently circulated around a wider group of international experts and their feedback incorporated. The proposed articles include new definitions for TDA (≥3 units in the 12 weeks before study enrollment) and hemoglobin thresholds for eligibility criteria (&lt;10 g/dL for women and &lt;11 g/dL for men). The revised document also provides separate (TDA vs non-TDA) and graded (major vs minor response) response criteria while preserving the requirement for a 12-week period of screening and observation on treatment.

AbstractChronic neutrophilic leukemia (CNL) is a rare BCR::ABL1‐negative myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) defined by persistent mature neutrophilic leukocytosis and bone marrow granulocyte hyperplasia. Atypical chronic myeloid leukemia (aCML) (myelodysplastic “[MDS]/MPN with neutrophilia” per World Health Organization [WHO]) is a MDS/MPN overlap disorder featuring dysplastic neutrophilia and circulating myeloid precursors. Both manifest with frequent hepatosplenomegaly and less commonly, bleeding, with high rates of leukemic transformation and death. The 2022 revised WHO classification conserved CNL diagnostic criteria of leukocytosis ≥25 × 109/L, neutrophils ≥80% with <10% circulating precursors, absence of dysplasia, and presence of an activating CSF3R mutation. ICC criteria are harmonized with those of other myeloid entities, with a key distinction being lower leukocytosis threshold (≥13 × 109/L) for cases CSF3R‐mutated. Criteria for aCML include leukocytosis ≥13 × 109/L, dysgranulopoiesis, circulating myeloid precursors ≥10%, and at least one cytopenia for MDS‐thresholds (ICC). In both classifications ASXL1 and SETBP1 (ICC), or SETBP1 ± ETNK1 (WHO) mutations can be used to support the diagnosis. Both diseases show hypercellular bone marrow due to a granulocytic proliferation, aCML distinguished by dysplasia in granulocytes ± other lineages. Absence of monocytosis, rare/no basophilia, or eosinophilia, <20% blasts, and exclusion of other MPN, MDS/MPN, and tyrosine kinase fusions, are mandated. Cytogenetic abnormalities are identified in ~1/3 of CNL and ~15–40% of aCML patients. The molecular signature of CNL is a driver mutation in colony‐stimulating factor 3 receptor—classically T618I, documented in >80% of cases. Atypical CML harbors a complex genomic backdrop with high rates of recurrent somatic mutations in ASXL1, SETBP1, TET2, SRSF2, EZH2, and less frequently in ETNK1. Leukemic transformation rates are ~10–25% and 30–40% for CNL and aCML, respectively. Overall survival is poor: 15–31 months in CNL and 12–20 months in aCML. The Mayo Clinic CNL risk model for survival stratifies patients according to platelets <160 × 109/L (2 points), leukocytes >60 × 109/L (1 point), and ASXL1 mutation (1 point); distinguishing low‐ (0–1 points) versus high‐risk (2–4 points) categories. The Mayo Clinic aCML risk model attributes 1 point each for: age >67 years, hemoglobin <10 g/dL, and TET2 mutation, delineating low‐ (0–1 risk factor) and high‐risk (≥2 risk factors) subgroups. Management is risk‐driven and symptom‐directed, with no current standard of care. Most commonly used agents include hydroxyurea, interferon, Janus kinase inhibitors, and hypomethylating agents, though none are disease‐modifying. Hematopoietic stem cell transplant is the only potentially curative modality and should be considered in eligible patients. Recent genetic profiling has disclosed CBL, CEBPA, EZH2, NRAS, TET2, and U2AF1 to represent high‐risk mutations in both entities. Actionable mutations (NRAS/KRAS, ETNK1) have also been identified, supporting novel agents targeting involved pathways. Preclinical and clinical studies evaluating new drugs (e.g., fedratinib, phase 2) and combinations are detailed.

Abstract Among 281 patients with essential thrombocythemia and calreticulin (CALR) mutation, we found a variant allele frequency of ≥60% to be associated with significantly shortened myelofibrosis-free survival, mostly apparent with CALR type-1 and CALR type-indeterminate mutations.

Abstract Disease Overview JAK2 unmutated or non‐polycythemia vera (PV) erythrocytosis encompasses a heterogenous spectrum of hereditary and acquired entities. Diagnosis Foremost in the evaluation of erythrocytosis is the exclusion of PV through JAK2 (inclusive of exons 12–15) mutation screening. Initial assessment should also include gathering of previous records on hematocrit (Hct) and hemoglobin (Hgb) levels, in order to streamline the diagnostic process by first distinguishing longstanding from acquired erythrocytosis; subsequent subcategorization is facilitated by serum erythropoietin (Epo) measurement, germline mutation screening, and review of historical data, including comorbid conditions and medication list. Hereditary erythrocytosis constitutes the main culprit in the context of longstanding erythrocytosis, especially when associated with a positive family history. In this regard, a subnormal serum Epo level suggests EPO receptor mutation. Otherwise, considerations include those associated with decreased (high oxygen affinity Hgb variants, 2,3‐bisphosphoglycerate deficiency, PIEZO1 mutations, methemoglobinemia) or normal oxygen tension at 50% Hgb saturation (P50). The latter include germline oxygen sensing pathway ( HIF2A–PHD2–VHL ) and other rare mutations. Acquired erythrocytosis commonly results from central (e.g., cardiopulmonary disease, high‐altitude habitat) or peripheral (e.g., renal artery stenosis) hypoxia. Other noteworthy conditions associated with acquired erythrocytosis include Epo‐producing tumors (e.g., renal cell carcinoma, cerebral hemangioblastoma) and drugs (e.g., testosterone, erythropoiesis stimulating agents, sodium‐glucose cotransporter‐2 inhibitors). Idiopathic erythrocytosis is an ill‐defined terminology that presumes the existence of an increased Hgb/Hct level without an identifiable etiology. Such classification often lacks accounting for normal outliers and is marred by truncated diagnostic evaluation. Management Current consensus treatment guidelines are not supported by hard evidence and their value is further undermined by limited phenotypic characterization and unfounded concerns for thrombosis. We are of the opinion that cytoreductive therapy and indiscriminate use of phlebotomy should be avoided in the treatment of non‐clonal erythrocytosis. However, it is reasonable to consider therapeutic phlebotomy if one were to demonstrate value in symptom control, with frequency determined by symptoms rather than Hct level. In addition, cardiovascular risk optimization and low dose aspirin is often advised. Future Directions Advances in molecular hematology might result in better characterization of “idiopathic erythrocytosis” and expansion of the repertoire for germline mutations in hereditary erythrocytosis. Prospective controlled studies are needed to clarify potential pathology from JAK2 unmutated erythrocytosis, as well as to document the therapeutic value of phlebotomy.