Citations

Myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) are a heterogeneous group of clonal stem cell disorders with an inherent tendency for leukemic transformation. Diagnosis is currently based on the presence of peripheral blood cytopenias, peripheral blood and bone marrow dysplasia/blasts, and clonal cytogenetic abnormalities. With the advent of next generation sequencing, recurrent somatic mutations in genes involved in epigenetic regulation (TET2, ASXL1, EZH2, DNMT3A, IDH1/2), RNA splicing (SF3B1, SRSF2, U2AF1, ZRSR2), DNA damage response (TP53), transcriptional regulation (RUNX1, BCOR, ETV6) and signal transduction (CBL, NRAS, JAK2) have been identified in MDS. Conventional prognostication is by the revised International prognostic scoring system (IPSS‐R) with additional adverse prognosis conferred by presence of ASXL1, EZH2, or TP53 mutations. Currently Food and Drug administration (FDA)‐approved drugs for the treatment of MDS are not curative and their effect on survival is limited; they include the hypomethylating agents (HMA) azacitidine and decitabine and lenalidomide for MDS with isolated del(5q). To date, allogeneic stem cell transplant (ASCT) remains the only treatment option for possible cure. Given the current lack of drugs with convincing evidence of favorable effect on survival, we consider ASCT as the treatment of choice for most patients with symptomatic disease, and especially for those with high‐risk disease. For nontransplant candidates, participation in clinical trials is preferred over conventional therapy. There is not one right way of treatment for patients who are not candidates for either ASCT or clinical trials and palliative drugs of choice depend on the clinical problem, such as symptomatic anemia (ESAs, danazol, HMA), thrombocytopenia (HMA), or neutropenia (myeloid growth factors). Conversely, there is no controlled evidence to support the use of iron chelating agents in MDS. Going forward, we believe it is time to incorporate mutation information in clinically derived prognostic models in MDS and encourage development of novel drugs with disease‐modifying activity. Am. J. Hematol. 91:76–89, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are clonal stem cell diseases, first conceptualized in 1951 by William Dameshek, and historically included chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). In 1960, Nowell and Hungerford discovered an invariable association between the Philadelphia chromosome (subsequently shown to harbor the causalBCR‐ABL1mutation) and CML; accordingly, the term MPN is primarily reserved for PV, ET, and PMF, although it includes other related clinicopathologic entities, according to the World Health Organization (WHO) classification system. In 2005, William Vainchenker and others described a Janus kinase 2 mutation (JAK2V617F) in MPN and this was followed by a series of additional descriptions of mutations that directly or indirectly activate JAK‐STAT:JAK2exon 12, myeloproliferative leukemia virus oncogene (MPL) and calreticulin (CALR) mutations. The discovery of these, mostly mutually exclusive, “driver” mutations has contributed to revisions of the WHO diagnostic criteria and risk stratification in MPN. Mutations other thanJAK2,CALRandMPLhave also been described in MPN and shown to provide additional prognostic information. From the standpoint of treatment, over the last 50 years, Louis Wasserman from the Unites States and Tiziano Barbui from Italy had skillfully organized and led a number of important clinical trials, whose results form the basis for current treatment strategies in MPN. More recently, allogeneic stem cell transplant, as a potentially curative treatment modality, and JAK inhibitors, as palliative drugs, have been added to the overall therapeutic armamentarium in myelofibrosis. In the current review, I will summarize the important advances made in the last 10 years regarding the science and practice of MPN. Am. J. Hematol. 91:50–58, 2016. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

Disease Overview: Ring sideroblasts (RS) are erythroid precursors with abnormal perinuclear mitochondrial iron accumulation. Two myeloid neoplasms defined by the presence of RS, include refractory anemia with ring sideroblasts (RARS) and RARS with thrombocytosis (RARS‐T).Diagnosis: RARS is a lower risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) with dysplasia limited to the erythroid lineage, <5% bone marrow (BM) blasts and ≥15% BM RS. RARS‐T is a provisional entity in the MDS/MPN (myeloproliferative neoplasm) overlap syndromes, with diagnostic features of RARS, along with a platelet count ≥450 × 10(9)/L and large atypical megakaryocytes similar to those observed in BCR‐ABL1 negative MPN.Mutations and Karyotype: Mutations in the SF3B1 gene are seen in ≥80% of patients with RARS and RARS‐T, and strongly correlate with the presence of BM RS; RARS‐T patients have additional mutations such as, JAK2V617F (∼60%), MPL (<5%), and CALR (<5%). Cytogenetic abnormalities are uncommon in both RARS and RARS‐T.Risk stratification: Most patients with RARS are stratified into lower risk groups by the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) for MDS and the revised IPSS. Disease outcome in RARS‐T is better than that of RARS, but worse than that of essential thrombocytosis. Both RARS and RARS‐T have a low risk of leukemic transformation.Treatment: Anemia and iron overload are complications in both diseases and are managed similar to lower risk MDS. Aspirin therapy is reasonable in RARS‐T, especially in the presence of JAK2V617F, but the value of platelet‐lowering drugs is uncertain. Case reports of RARS‐T therapy with lenalidomide warrant additional studies. Am. J. Hematol. 90:550–559, 2015. © 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.