[Analysis of gene mutations and clinic features in 108 patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm]

[Analysis of the effect of gene mutations on the efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis based on second-generation sequencing technology]

Objective: To assess the effect of gene mutations on the efficacy of ruxolitinib for treating myelofibrosis (MF) . Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the clinical data of 56 patients with MF treated with ruxolitinib from July 2017 to December 2020 and applied second-generation sequencing (NGS) technology to detect 127 hematologic tumor-related gene mutations. Additionally, we analyzed the relationship between mutated genes and the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Results: ①Among the 56 patients, there were 36 cases of primary bone marrow fibrosis (PMF) , 9 cases of bone marrow fibrosis (ppv-mf) after polycythemia vera, and 11 cases of bone marrow fibrosis (PET-MF) after primary thrombocytosis (ET) . ②Fifty-six patients with MF taking ruxolitinib underwent NGS, among whom, 50 (89.29%) carried driver mutations, 22 (39.29%) carried ≥3 mutations, and 29 (51.79%) carried high-risk mutations (HMR) . ③ For patients with MF carrying ≥ 3 mutations, ruxolitinib still had a better effect of improving somatic symptoms and shrinking the spleen (P=0.001, P<0.001) , but TTF and PFS were significantly shorter in patients carrying ≥ 3 mutations (P=0.007, P=0.042) . ④For patients carrying ≥ 2 HMR mutations, ruxolitinib was less effective in shrinking the spleen than in those who did not carry HMR (t= 10.471, P=0.034) , and the TTF and PFS were significantly shorter in patients carrying ≥2 HMR mutations (P<0.001, P=0.001) . ⑤Ruxolitinib had poorer effects on spleen reduction, symptom improvement, and stabilization of myelofibrosis in patients carrying additional mutations in ASXL1, EZH2, and SRSF2. Moreover, patients carrying ASXL1 and EZH2 mutations had significantly shorter TTF [ASXL1: 360 (55-1270) d vs 440 (55-1268) d, z=-3.115, P=0.002; EZH2: 327 (55-975) d vs 404 (50-1270) d, z=-3.219, P=0.001], and significantly shorter PFS compared to non-carriers [ASXL1: 457 (50-1331) d vs 574 (55-1437) d, z=-3.219, P=0.001) ; 428 (55-1331) d vs 505 (55-1437) d, z=-2.576, P=0.008]. Conclusion: The type and number of mutations carried by patients with myelofibrosis and HMR impact the efficacy of ruxolitinib.

Genetic Background of Polycythemia Vera

Polycythemia vera belongs to myeloproliferative neoplasms, essentially by affecting the erythroblastic lineage. JAK2 alterations have emerged as major driver mutations triggering PV-phenotype with the V617F mutation detected in nearly 98% of cases. That’s why JAK2 targeting therapeutic strategies have rapidly emerged to counter the aggravation of the disease. Over decades of research, to go further in the understanding of the disease and its evolution, a wide panel of genetic alterations affecting multiple genes has been highlighted. These are mainly involved in alternative splicing, epigenetic, miRNA regulation, intracellular signaling, and transcription factors expression. If JAK2 mutation, irrespective of the nature of the alteration, is known to be a crucial event for the disease to initiate, additional mutations seem to be markers of progression and poor prognosis. These discoveries have helped to characterize the complex genomic landscape of PV, resulting in potentially new adapted therapeutic strategies for patients concerning all the genetic interferences.