Prognostic categorization of primary myelofibrosis patients of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa
Background: Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is a least common type of myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) and is clonally derived stem cell disorder classified as Philadelphia chromosome negative MPN. The Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) utilizes five variables including age, haemoglobin level, white blood cells count, peripheral blood blasts and other symptoms for characterization of myelofibrosis patients. The objective of this study was to categorize primary myelofibrosis patients of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa. Methods: This cross-sectional analysis was carried out from June 2018 till May 2019. Blood samples and other information were collected from 50 PMF patients enrolled at the assigned health care facilities of Peshawar. Non-probability convenience sampling technique was used, and an informed and written consent was obtained from the participants. DIPSS was utilized for the prognostic categorization of PMF patients. Results: Majority (26, 52%) of the patients were in the age group II (41–60 years) and most (34, 68%) of them were male. Participants were categorized into four risk groups (low, intermediate-1, intermediate-2, and high) by applying DIPSS scoring system. Among the 50 patients, 3 (6%) were in low-risk group, whereas only one was in the high-risk group. Thirteen (26%) patients fell in intermediate-1 risk category and 33 (66%) were placed in the intermediate-2 risk group. Conclusion: Most of the myelofibrosis patients in Peshawar fall in intermediate-risk group while small percentage was included in high-risk group.
Pak J Physiol 2021;17(1):8–11
Tefferi A. Primary myelofibrosis: 2017 update on diagnosis, risk‐stratification, and management. American journal of hematology. 2016;91(12):1262-71.
Masarova L, Alhuraiji A, Bose P, Daver N, Pemmaraju N, Cortes J, et al. Significance of thrombocytopenia in patients with primary and postessential thrombocythemia/polycythemia vera myelofibrosis. European journal of haematology. 2018;100(3):257-63.
Dolgikh TY, Domnikova N, Tornuev YV, Vinogradova E, Krinitsyna YM. Incidence of myelofibrosis in chronic myeloid leukemia, multiple myeloma, and chronic lymphoid leukemia during various phases of diseases. Bulletin of experimental biology and medicine. 2017;162(4):483-7.
Tefferi A, Guglielmelli P, Pardanani A, Vannucchi AM. Myelofibrosis treatment algorithm 2018. Blood cancer journal. 2018;8(8):1-7.
Passamonti F, Giorgino T, Mora B, Guglielmelli P, Rumi E, Maffioli M, et al. A clinical-molecular prognostic model to predict survival in patients with post polycythemia vera and post essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2017;31(12):2726-31.
Mannelli L, Guglielmelli P, Vannucchi AM. Stem cell transplant for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Expert review of hematology. 2020;13(4):363-74.
Stevens EA, Jenkins IC, Beppu LW, Zhang Q, Salit R, Loeb KR, et al. Targeted sequencing improves DIPSS-Plus prognostic scoring in myelofibrosis patients undergoing allogeneic transplantation. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2020;26(7):1371-4.
Abou Zahr A, Salama ME, Carreau N, Tremblay D, Verstovsek S, Mesa R, et al. Bone marrow fibrosis in myelofibrosis: pathogenesis, prognosis and targeted strategies. Haematologica. 2016;101(6):660.
Finazzi G, Vannucchi AM, Barbui T. Prefibrotic myelofibrosis: treatment algorithm 2018. Blood cancer journal. 2018;8(11):1-5.
Bannow BTS, Salit RB, Storer BE, Stevens EA, Wu D, Yeung C, et al. Hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis: the dynamic international prognostic scoring system plus risk predicts post-transplant outcomes. Biology of Blood and Marrow Transplantation. 2018;24(2):386-92.
Hernández-Boluda J-C, Pereira A, Correa J-G, Alvarez-Larrán A, Ferrer-Marín F, Raya J-M, et al. Prognostic risk models for transplant decision-making in myelofibrosis. Annals of hematology. 2018;97(5):813-20.
Tefferi A. Primary myelofibrosis: 2014 update on diagnosis, risk‐stratification, and management. American journal of hematology. 2014;89(9):915-25.
Gangat N, Tefferi A. Myelofibrosis biology and contemporary management. British journal of haematology. 2020;191(2):152-70.
Viechtbauer W, Smits L, Kotz D, Budé L, Spigt M, Serroyen J, et al. A simple formula for the calculation of sample size in pilot studies. Journal of clinical epidemiology. 2015;68(11):1375-9.
Tefferi A, Lasho TL, Jimma T, Finke CM, Gangat N, Vaidya R, et al., editors. One thousand patients with primary myelofibrosis: the mayo clinic experience. Mayo Clinic Proceedings; 2012: Elsevier.
Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Levy RS, Gupta V, DiPersio JF, et al. Efficacy, safety, and survival with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis: results of a median 3-year follow-up of COMFORT-I. haematologica. 2015;100(4):479.
Rumi E, Boveri E, Bellini M, Pietra D, Ferretti VV, Sant’Antonio E, et al. Clinical course and outcome of essential thrombocythemia and prefibrotic myelofibrosis according to the revised WHO 2016 diagnostic criteria. Oncotarget. 2017;8(60):101735.
Mora B, Giorgino T, Guglielmelli P, Rumi E, Maffioli M, Rambaldi A, et al. Value of cytogenetic abnormalities in post-polycythemia vera and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis: a study of the MYSEC project. haematologica. 2018;103(9):e392
Marcellino BK, Verstovsek S, Mascarenhas J. The myelodepletive phenotype in myelofibrosis: clinical relevance and therapeutic implication. Clinical Lymphoma Myeloma and Leukemia. 2020;20(7):415-21.
Masarova L, Bose P, Daver N, Pemmaraju N, Newberry KJ, Manshouri T, et al. Patients with post-essential thrombocythemia and post-polycythemia vera differ from patients with primary myelofibrosis. Leukemia research. 2017;59:110-6.
Copyright (c) 2021 Pakistan Journal of Physiology
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Pakistan Journal of Physiology, Pak J Physiol, PJP is FREE for research and academic purposes. It can be downloaded and stored, printed, cited and quoted with full reference of, and acknowledgement to the PJP.