Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is currently the only treatment modality that is capable of curing myelofibrosis (MF). Although outcomes of AHSCT have improved vastly in recent years owing to advancements in HLA typing, conditioning regimens, and supportive care, it remains a procedure with a considerable risk in MF patients due to conditioning regimen related toxicity, higher rates of graft failure, infections, and graft versus host disease (GVHD). Recent progress in the treatment and prevention of GVHD with post-transplant cyclophosphamide has also rendered transplantation from alternative donors feasible and safer, thus improving access to patients without HLA-identical donors. Accordingly, all patients with intermediate or high-risk MF today should be referred for potential transplant evaluation to consider the pros and cons of an early versus a delayed transplant strategy. Individual risk assessment in MF is best facilitated by contemporary prognostic models that incorporate both clinical and genetic risk factors. The current review highlights new information regarding risk stratification in MF, anchored by practical algorithms that facilitate patient selection for specific treatment actions, including AHSCT.

When and how to transplant in myelofibrosis – recent trends / Sharma, Naman; Loscocco, Giuseppe G.; Gangat, Naseema; Guglielmelli, Paola; Pardanani, Animesh; Vannucchi, Alessandro M.; Alkhateeb, Hassan B.; Tefferi, Ayalew; Ho, Vincent T.. - In: LEUKEMIA & LYMPHOMA. - ISSN 1042-8194. - ELETTRONICO. - (2024), pp. 1-19. [10.1080/10428194.2024.2422835]

When and how to transplant in myelofibrosis – recent trends

Loscocco, Giuseppe G.;Guglielmelli, Paola;Vannucchi, Alessandro M.;
2024

Abstract

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (AHSCT) is currently the only treatment modality that is capable of curing myelofibrosis (MF). Although outcomes of AHSCT have improved vastly in recent years owing to advancements in HLA typing, conditioning regimens, and supportive care, it remains a procedure with a considerable risk in MF patients due to conditioning regimen related toxicity, higher rates of graft failure, infections, and graft versus host disease (GVHD). Recent progress in the treatment and prevention of GVHD with post-transplant cyclophosphamide has also rendered transplantation from alternative donors feasible and safer, thus improving access to patients without HLA-identical donors. Accordingly, all patients with intermediate or high-risk MF today should be referred for potential transplant evaluation to consider the pros and cons of an early versus a delayed transplant strategy. Individual risk assessment in MF is best facilitated by contemporary prognostic models that incorporate both clinical and genetic risk factors. The current review highlights new information regarding risk stratification in MF, anchored by practical algorithms that facilitate patient selection for specific treatment actions, including AHSCT.
2024
1
19
Sharma, Naman; Loscocco, Giuseppe G.; Gangat, Naseema; Guglielmelli, Paola; Pardanani, Animesh; Vannucchi, Alessandro M.; Alkhateeb, Hassan B.; Teffer...espandi
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in FLORE sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificatore per citare o creare un link a questa risorsa: https://hdl.handle.net/2158/1403763
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 0
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 0
social impact