Reduced intensity hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for myelofibrosis in accelerated-phase

2024 update on allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant for myelofibrosis: A review of current data and applications on risk stratification and management

BACKGROUND

Allogeneic hemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) currently remains the only curative treatment for patients with myelofibrosis (MF). Transplant related mortality (TRM) and relapse, remain two significant complications which need to be addressed.

AIMS

The aim of this manuscript is to review current available reports on changes which have recently occurred, to improve the outcome of MF patients undergoing an allogeneic HSCT.

METHODS

Published papers were used to analyze different aspects of allogeneic HSCT.

RESULTS

Changes and updates are provided on selection of patients, prognostic systems, managing splenomegaly, conditioning regimens, predicting transplant outcome, stem cell sources, stem cell donors, graft versus host disease (GvHD) prophylaxis, patients with blast phase, hematopoietic reconstitution, disease markers, donor chimerism, and treatment of relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

The review outlines new transplant platforms which are now available for patients with myelofibrosis, together with persisting problems, among which, older age combined with marrow fibrosis and an inflammatory disease. Relapse also requires aggressive monitoring of drivers mutations, and early cellular therapy.

Splenic irradiation for myelofibrosis prior to hematopoietic cell transplantation: A global collaborative analysis

Splenomegaly is the clinical hallmark of myelofibrosis. Splenomegaly at the time of allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is associated with graft failure and poor graft function. Strategies to reduce spleen size before HCT especially after failure to Janus kinase (JAK) inhibition represent unmet clinical needs in the field. Here, we leveraged a global collaboration to investigate the safety and efficacy of splenic irradiation as part of the HCT platform for patients with myelofibrosis. We included 59 patients, receiving irradiation within a median of 2 weeks (range, 0.9-12 weeks) before HCT. Overall, the median spleen size prior to irradiation was 23 cm (range, 14-35). Splenic irradiation resulted in a significant and rapid spleen size reduction in 97% of patients (57/59), with a median decrease of 5.0 cm (95% confidence interval, 4.1-6.3 cm). The most frequent adverse event was thrombocytopenia, with no correlation between irradiation dose and hematological toxicities. The 3-year overall survival was 62% (95% CI, 48%-76%) and 1-year non-relapse mortality was 26% (95% CI, 14%-38%). Independent predictors for survival were severe thrombocytopenia and anemia before irradiation, transplant-specific risk score, higher-intensity conditioning, and present portal vein thrombosis. When using a propensity score matching adjusted for common confounders, splenic irradiation was associated with significantly reduced relapse (p = .01), showing a 3-year incidence of 12% for splenic irradiation versus 29% for patients with immediate HCT and 38% for patients receiving splenectomy. In conclusion, splenic irradiation immediately before HCT is a reasonable approach in patients experiencing JAK inhibition failure and is associated with a low incidence of relapse.

Graft-versus-host disease and impact on relapse in myelofibrosis undergoing hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (alloHSCT) remains the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis (MF). Relapse occurs in 10-30% and remains a major factor for dismal outcomes. Previous work suggested that graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) might be associated with risk of relapse. This study included 341 patients undergoing their first (n = 308) or second (n = 33) alloHSCT. Anti-T-lymphocyte or antithymocyte globulin was used for GVHD prophylaxis in almost all patients. Median time to neutrophile and platelet engraftment was 13 days and 19 days, respectively. The cumulative incidence of acute GVHD grade II-IV was 41% (median, 31 days; range, 7-112). Grade III-IV acute GVHD was observed in 22%. The cumulative incidence of chronic GVHD was 61%. Liver was affected in 23% of acute GVHD cases and 46% of chronic GVHD cases. Severe acute GVHD was associated with high non-relapse mortality. The development of acute GVHD grade II and moderate GVHD was an independent factor for reduced risk for relapse after transplantation without increased risk for non-relapse mortality, while especially acute GVHD grade IV was associated with high non-relapse mortality. Last, we identified that ongoing response to ruxolitinib, accelerated-phase MF at time of transplantation and splenectomy prior to transplantation were independent predictors for relapse.

Proinflammatory phenotype of iPS cell-derived JAK2 V617F megakaryocytes induces fibrosis in 3D in vitro bone marrow niche

The myeloproliferative disease polycythemia vera (PV) driven by the JAK2 V617F mutation can transform into myelofibrosis (post-PV-MF). It remains an open question how JAK2 V617F in hematopoietic stem cells induces MF. Megakaryocytes are major players in murine PV models but are difficult to study in the human setting. We generated induced pluripotent stem cells (iPSCs) from JAK2 V617F PV patients and differentiated them into megakaryocytes. In differentiation assays, JAK2 V617F iPSCs recapitulated the pathognomonic skewed megakaryocytic and erythroid differentiation. JAK2 V617F iPSCs had a TPO-independent and increased propensity to differentiate into megakaryocytes. RNA sequencing of JAK2 V617F iPSC-derived megakaryocytes reflected a proinflammatory, profibrotic phenotype and decreased ribosome biogenesis. In three-dimensional (3D) coculture, JAK2 V617F megakaryocytes induced a profibrotic phenotype through direct cell contact, which was reversed by the JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib. The 3D coculture system opens the perspective for further disease modeling and drug discovery.

Indication and management of allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation in myelofibrosis: updated recommendations by the EBMT/ELN International Working Group

New options for medical therapy and risk scoring systems containing molecular data are leading to increased complexity in the management of patients with myelofibrosis. To inform patients' optimal care, we updated the 2015 guidelines on indications for and management of allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT) with the support of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT) and European LeukemiaNet (ELN). New recommendations were produced using a consensus-building methodology after a comprehensive review of articles released from January, 2015 to December, 2022. Seven domains and 18 key questions were selected through a series of questionnaires using a Delphi process. Key recommendations in this update include: patients with primary myelofibrosis and an intermediate-2 or high-risk Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System score, or a high-risk Mutation-Enhanced International Prognostic Score Systems (MIPSS70 or MIPSS70-plus) score, or a low-risk or intermediate-risk Myelofibrosis Transplant Scoring System score should be considered candidates for allogeneic HSCT. All patients who are candidates for allogeneic HSCT with splenomegaly greater than 5 cm below the left costal margin or splenomegaly-related symptoms should receive a spleen-directed treatment, ideally with a JAK-inhibitor; HLA-matched sibling donors remain the preferred donor source to date. Reduced intensity conditioning and myeloablative conditioning are both valid options for patients with myelofibrosis. Regular post-transplantation driver mutation monitoring is recommended to detect and treat early relapse with donor lymphocyte infusion. In a disease where evidence-based guidance is scarce, these recommendations might help clinicians and patients in shared decision making.

How I treat transplant-eligible patients with myelofibrosis

Despite the approval of Janus kinase inhibitors and novel agents for patients with myelofibrosis (MF), disease-modifying responses remain limited, and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) remains the only potentially curative treatment option. The number of HSCTs for MF continues to increase worldwide, but its inherent therapy-related morbidity and mortality limit its use for many patients. Furthermore, patients with MF often present at an older age, with cytopenia, splenomegaly, and severe bone marrow fibrosis, posing challenges in managing them throughout the HSCT procedure. Although implementation of molecular analyses enabled improved understanding of disease mechanisms and subsequently sparked development of novel drugs with promising activity, prospective trials in the HSCT setting are often lacking, making an evidence-based decision process particularly difficult. To illustrate how we approach patients with MF with respect to HSCT, we present 3 different clinical scenarios to capture relevant aspects that influence our decision making regarding indication for, or against, HSCT. We describe how we perform HSCT according to different risk categories and, furthermore, discuss our up-to-date approach to reduce transplant-related complications. Last, we show how to harness graft-versus-MF effects, particularly in the posttransplant period to achieve the best possible outcomes for patients.

Immunotherapy in hematologic malignancies: achievements, challenges and future prospects

The immune-cell origin of hematologic malignancies provides a unique avenue for the understanding of both the mechanisms of immune responsiveness and immune escape, which has accelerated the progress of immunotherapy. Several categories of immunotherapies have been developed and are being further evaluated in clinical trials for the treatment of blood cancers, including stem cell transplantation, immune checkpoint inhibitors, antigen-targeted antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, tumor vaccines, and adoptive cell therapies. These immunotherapies have shown the potential to induce long-term remission in refractory or relapsed patients and have led to a paradigm shift in cancer treatment with great clinical success. Different immunotherapeutic approaches have their advantages but also shortcomings that need to be addressed. To provide clinicians with timely information on these revolutionary therapeutic approaches, the comprehensive review provides historical perspectives on the applications and clinical considerations of the immunotherapy. Here, we first outline the recent advances that have been made in the understanding of the various categories of immunotherapies in the treatment of hematologic malignancies. We further discuss the specific mechanisms of action, summarize the clinical trials and outcomes of immunotherapies in hematologic malignancies, as well as the adverse effects and toxicity management and then provide novel insights into challenges and future directions.

Blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasm: contemporary review and 2024 treatment algorithm

Leukemic transformation in myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), also referred to as "blast-phase MPN", is the most feared disease complication, with incidence estimates of 1-4% for essential thrombocythemia, 3-7% for polycythemia vera, and 9-13% for primary myelofibrosis. Diagnosis of MPN-BP requires the presence of ≥20% circulating or bone marrow blasts; a lower level of excess blasts (10-19%) constitutes "accelerated phase" disease (MPN-AP). Neither "intensive" nor "less intensive" chemotherapy, by itself, secures long-term survival in MPN-BP. Large-scale retrospective series have consistently shown a dismal prognosis in MPN-BP, with 1- and 3-year survival estimates of <20% and <5%, respectively. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT) offers the possibility of a >30% 3-year survival rate and should be pursued, ideally, while the patient is still in chronic phase disease. The value of pre-transplant bridging chemotherapy is uncertain in MPN-AP while it is advised in MPN-BP; in this regard, we currently favor combination chemotherapy with venetoclax (Ven) and hypomethylating agent (HMA); response is more likely in the absence of complex/monosomal karyotype and presence of TET2 mutation. Furthermore, in the presence of an IDH mutation, the use of IDH inhibitors, either alone or in combination with Ven-HMA, can be considered. Pre-transplant clearance of excess blasts is desired but not mandated; in this regard, additional salvage chemotherapy is more likely to compromise transplant eligibility rather than improve post-transplant survival. Controlled studies are needed to determine the optimal pre- and post-transplant measures that target transplant-associated morbidity and post-transplant relapse.

Outcomes after allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant in patients diagnosed with blast phase of myeloproliferative neoplasms: A retrospective study from the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (allo-HCT) provides the only potential route to long-term remission in patients diagnosed with blast phase transformation of myeloproliferative neoplasm (BP-MPN). We report on a large, retrospective European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation registry-based study of BP-MPN patients undergoing allo-HCT. BP-MPN patients undergoing first allo-HCT between 2005 and 2019 were included. A total of 663 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 62 months, the estimated 3-year overall survival (OS) was 36% (95% confidence interval [CI], 32-36). Factors associated with lower OS were Karnofsky Performance Score (KPS) <90 (hazard ratio [HR] 1.65, p < .001) and active disease at allo-HCT (HR 1.45, p < .001), whereas patients undergoing allo-HCT more recently associated with a higher OS (HR 0.96, p = .008). In a selected patient's population, the 3-year OS of patients undergoing allo-HCT in complete response (CR) and with a KPS ≥90 was 60%. KPS < 90 (HR 1.4, p = .001) and active disease (HR 1.44, p = .0004) were associated with a lower progression-free survival (PFS). Conversely, most recent allo-HCT associated with a higher PFS (HR 0.96, p = .008). Active disease at allo-HCT (HR 1.34, p = .03) was associated with a higher cumulative incidence of relapse (RI) and allo-HCT in earlier calendar years (HR 0.96, p = .02) associated with a lower RI. Last, KPS < 90 (HR 1.91, p < .001), active disease (HR 1.74, p = .003) and allo-HCT from mismatched related donors were associated with a higher non-relapse mortality (HR 2.66, p = .003). In this large series of BP-MPN patients, about one third were alive at 3 years after transplantation. Patients undergoing allo-HCT in the more recent era, with a KPS ≥90 and in CR at transplant had a better prognosis.

Targeted Therapy for MPNs: Going Beyond JAK Inhibitors

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

JAK inhibition is an effective means of controlling symptom burden and improving splenomegaly in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). However, a majority of patients treated with JAK inhibition will have disease progression with long-term use. In In this review, we focus on the investigation of novel targeted agents beyond JAK inhibitors both in the chronic phase of disease and in the accelerated/blast phase of disease.

RECENT FINDINGS

Relevant targeted therapies in MPNs include BET inhibitors, BCL inhibitors, LSD1 inhibitors, PI3K inhibitors, IDH inhibitors, telomerase inhibitors, and MDM2 inhibitor. Agents within these classes have been investigated either as monotherapy or in combination with a JAK inhibitor. We summarize the prospective data for these agents along with detailing the ongoing phase III trials incorporating these agents. While JAK inhibition has been a mainstay of therapy in MPNs, a majority of patients will have disease of progression. JAK inhibitors also have limited anti-clonal effect and do not impact the rate of progression to the blast phase of disease. The novel therapies detailed in this review not only show promise in ameliorating the symptom burden of MPNs but may be able to alter the natural history of disease.

Splenomegaly in patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis who are candidates for allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation: a Position Paper on behalf of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of the EBMT

Splenomegaly is a hallmark of myelofibrosis, a debilitating haematological malignancy for which the only curative option is allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). Considerable splenic enlargement might be associated with a higher risk of delayed engraftment and graft failure, increased non-relapse mortality, and worse overall survival after HCT as compared with patients without significantly enlarged splenomegaly. Currently, there are no standardised guidelines to assist transplantation physicians in deciding optimal management of splenomegaly before HCT. Therefore, the aim of this Position Paper is to offer a shared position statement on this issue. An international group of haematologists, transplantation physicians, gastroenterologists, surgeons, radiotherapists, and radiologists with experience in the treatment of myelofibrosis contributed to this Position Paper. The key issues addressed by this group included the assessment, prevalence, and clinical significance of splenomegaly, and the need for a therapeutic intervention before HCT for the control of splenomegaly. Specific scenarios, including splanchnic vein thrombosis and COVID-19, are also discussed. All patients with myelofibrosis must have their spleen size assessed before allogeneic HCT. Myelofibrosis patients with splenomegaly measuring 5 cm and larger, particularly when exceeding 15 cm below the left costal margin, or with splenomegaly-related symptoms, could benefit from treatment with the aim of reducing the spleen size before HCT. In the absence of, or loss of, response, patients with increasing spleen size should be evaluated for second-line options, depending on availability, patient fitness, and centre experience. Splanchnic vein thrombosis is not an absolute contraindication for HCT, but a multidisciplinary approach is warranted. Finally, prevention and treatment of COVID-19 should adhere to standard recommendations for immunocompromised patients.

Improving allogeneic stem cell transplantation in myelofibrosis

In this review, we will outline dimensions in which outcome of patients with myelofibrosis undergoing curative treatment can be optimized: patient selection, transplant procedure, and posttransplant prevention or treatment of relapse. For patient selection, fortunately, as with several other hematologic malignancies, the management of patients with myelofibrosis has very much entered the molecular era, with the establishment of several driver and nondriver mutations, allowing more individualized selection for treatment. For the transplant procedure itself, different conditioning intensities do not seem to play a distinctive role with regards to outcome posttransplant but still need to be compared in the molecular era. While many patients nowadays may receive ruxolitinib before transplant, recent studies may facilitate fine-tuning and integration of ruxolitinib into the transplant algorithm. The role of novel inhibitors for the transplant setting remains unclear. For the posttransplant phase, evidence remains scarce, with experiences of donor-lymphocyte infusions for relapse management but more efforts are needed in understanding relapse and identifying and treating patients at high risk for relapse.

How We Manage Myelofibrosis Candidates for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Moving from indication to transplantation is a critical process in myelofibrosis. Most of guidelines specifically focus on either myelofibrosis disease or transplant procedure, and, currently, no distinct indication for the management of MF candidates to transplant is available. Nevertheless, this period of time is crucial for the transplant outcome because engraftment, non-relapse mortality, and relapse incidence are greatly dependent upon the pre-transplant management. Based on these premises, in this review, we will go through the path of identification of the MF patients suitable for a transplant, by using disease-specific prognostic scores, and the evaluation of eligibility for a transplant, based on performance, comorbidity, and other combined tools. Then, we will focus on the process of donor and conditioning regimens’ choice. The pre-transplant management of splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, cytopenias, iron overload and transplant timing will be comprehensively discussed. The principal aim of this review is, therefore, to give a practical guidance for managing MF patients who are potential candidates for allo-HCT.