Abstract
Although patients with primary and secondary myelofibrosis are at risk of disease progression into acute myeloid leukemia, they are heterogenous at presentation and have a highly variable survival. In the last decade, with the rapid expansion of our knowledge in the impact of cytogenetics and molecular makers, these have been, in addition to the traditional clinical parameters, incorporated into different prognostic models. These models not only help in disease prognostication, but they also play an important role in treatment decision making.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Cervantes F, et al. New prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis based on a study of the international working group for myelofibrosis research and treatment. Blood. 2009;113:2895–901.
Passamonti F, et al. A dynamic prognostic model to predict survival in primary myelofibrosis: a study by the IWG-MRT (international working group for myeloproliferative neoplasms research and treatment). Blood. 2010;115:1703–8.
Caramazza D, et al. Refined cytogenetic-risk categorization for overall and leukemia-free survival in primary myelofibrosis: a single center study of 433 patients. Leukemia. 2011;25:82–8.
Gangat N, et al. DIPSS plus: a refined dynamic international prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis that incorporates prognostic information from karyotype, platelet count, and transfusion status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:392–7.
Tefferi A, et al. Revised cytogenetic risk stratification in primary myelofibrosis: analysis based on 1002 informative patients. Leukemia. 2018;32:1189–99.
Tefferi A, et al. Driver mutations and prognosis in primary myelofibrosis: Mayo-Careggi MPN alliance study of 1,095 patients. Am J Hematol. 2018;93:348–55.
Vannucchi AM, et al. Mutations and prognosis in primary myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2013;27:1861–9.
Tefferi A, et al. U2AF1 mutation types in primary myelofibrosis: phenotypic and prognostic distinctions. Leukemia. 2018;32:2274–8.
Guglielmelli P, et al. MIPSS70: mutation-enhanced international prognostic score system for transplantation-age patients with primary myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;36:310–8.
Tefferi A, et al. MIPSS701 version 2.0: mutation and karyotype-enhanced international prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1769–70.
Tefferi A, et al. GIPSS: genetically inspired prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2018;32:1631–42.
Kuykendall AT, et al. Genetically inspired prognostic scoring system (GIPSS) outperforms dynamic international prognostic scoring system (DIPSS) in myelofibrosis patients. Am J Hematol. 2019;94:87–92.
Tefferi A. Primary myelofibrosis: 2021 update on diagnosis, risk-stratification and management. Am J Hematol. 2021;96:145–62.
Tefferi A, et al. Survival and prognosis among 1545 patients with contemporary polycythemia vera: an international study. Leukemia. 2013;27:1874–81.
Cervantes F, Alvarez-Larrán A, Talarn C, Gómez M, Montserrat E. Myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia following essential thrombocythaemia: actuarial probability, presenting characteristics and evolution in a series of 195 patients. Br J Haematol. 2002;118:786–90.
Wolanskyj AP, Schwager SM, McClure RF, Larson DR, Tefferi A. Essential thrombocythemia beyond the first decade: life expectancy, long-term complication rates, and prognostic factors. Mayo Clin Proc. 2006;81:159–66.
Björkholm M, Hultcrantz M, Derolf ÅR. Leukemic transformation in myeloproliferative neoplasms: therapy-related or unrelated? Best Pract Res Clin Haematol. 2014;27:141–53.
James C, et al. A unique clonal JAK2 mutation leading to constitutive signalling causes polycythaemia vera. Nature. 2005;434:1144–8.
Baxter EJ, et al. Acquired mutation of the tyrosine kinase JAK2 in human myeloproliferative disorders. Lancet. 2005;365:1054–61.
Passamonti F, Mora B, Barraco D, Maffioli M. Post-ET and post-PV myelofibrosis: updates on a distinct prognosis from primary myelofibrosis. Curr Hematol Malig Rep. 2018;13:173–82.
Courtier F, et al. Targeted molecular characterization shows differences between primary and secondary myelofibrosis. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2020;59:30–9.
Hernández-Boluda JC, et al. The international prognostic scoring system does not accurately discriminate different risk categories in patients with post-essential thrombocythemia and post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2014;99:e55–7.
Gowin K, Coakley M, Kosiorek H, Mesa R. Discrepancies of applying primary myelofibrosis prognostic scores for patients with post polycythemia vera/essential thrombocytosis myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2016;101:e405–6.
Tefferi A, et al. Application of current prognostic models for primary myelofibrosis in the setting of post-polycythemia vera or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2017;31:2851–2.
Passamonti F, et al. A clinical-molecular prognostic model to predict survival in patients with post polycythemia vera and post essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2017;31:2726–31.
Masarova L, Kantarjian H, Verstovsek S. Validation of the myelofibrosis secondary to PV and ET-prognostic model in newly diagnosed patients with post-polycythemia vera and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis: MD Anderson cancer center. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2017;17:110–6.
Hernández-Boluda JC, et al. Performance of the myelofibrosis secondary to PV and ET-prognostic model (MYSEC-PM) in a series of 262 patients from the Spanish registry of myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2018;32:553–5.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Gill, H., Leung, G. (2023). Prognostic Models for Primary and Secondary Myelofibrosis. In: Gill, H., Kwong, YL. (eds) Pathogenesis and Treatment of Leukemia. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3810-0_39
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-3810-0_39
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-99-3809-4
Online ISBN: 978-981-99-3810-0
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)