ArticleLeukemia2011
Refined cytogenetic-risk categorization for overall and leukemia-free survival in primary myelofibrosis: a single center study of 433 patients.
Article in Leukemia, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03959371 (Observational, Retrospective and Prospective Study on the Use of Ruxolitinib in Myelofibrosis Patients in Lombardy, Italy), which is not on this map. Cited by 75 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Observational, Retrospective and Prospective Study on the Use of Ruxolitinib in Myelofibrosis Patients in Lombardy, Italy
Who cites it
75 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 175 citations in OpenAlex.
- Philadelphia chromosome-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms: revised management recommendations from European LeukemiaNet.Leukemia · 2018Guideline
- Myeloproliferative Neoplasms, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2016Guideline
- Guideline
- Monosomal karyotype is associated with poor outcomes in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-negative acute lymphoblastic leukemia receiving chemotherapy but not allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation.Annals of hematology · 2020Trial
- Momelotinib therapy for myelofibrosis: a 7-year follow-up.Blood cancer journal · 2018Trial
- Trial
- Outcomes of Allogeneic Hematopoietic Cell Transplantation in Patients with Myelofibrosis with Prior Exposure to Janus Kinase 1/2 Inhibitors.Biology of blood and marrow transplantation : journal of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation · 2016Trial
- Chromosome 5q deletion is extremely rare in patients with myelofibrosis.Leukemia research · 2013Trial
- Real World Management of Cytopenias and Infections in Patients With Myelofibrosis Treated With Ruxolitinib.EJHaem · 2025Article
- Prognostic and Predictive Models in Myelofibrosis.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2024Review
- Real-world clinical characteristics of post-essential thrombocythemia and post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis.Annals of hematology · 2024Article
- Management of classical Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms in Asia: consensus of the Asian Myeloid Working Group.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2023Review
- Article
- Blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasm: contemporary review and 2024 treatment algorithm.Blood cancer journal · 2023Review
- Myelofibrosis and Survival Prognostic Models: A Journey between Past and Future.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Towards a Personalized Definition of Prognosis in Philadelphia-Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2022Review
- Improved survival of patients with myelofibrosis in the last decade: Single-center experience.Cancer · 2022Article
- The Prognostic Role of Cytogenetics Analysis in Philadelphia Negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Review
- Integration of Molecular Information in Risk Assessment of Patients with Myeloproliferative Neoplasms.Cells · 2021Review
- Outcomes following second allogeneic haematopoietic cell transplantation in patients with myelofibrosis: a retrospective study of the Chronic Malignancies Working Party of EBMT.Bone marrow transplantation · 2021Article
15 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We have previously identified sole +9, 13q- or 20q-, as 'favorable' and sole +8 or complex karyotype as 'unfavorable' cytogenetic abnormalities in primary myelofibrosis (PMF). In this study of 433 PMF patients, we describe additional sole abnormalities with favorable (chromosome 1 translocations/duplications) or unfavorable (-7/7q-) prognosis and also show that other sole or two abnormalities that do not include i(17q), -5/5q-, 12p-, inv(3) or 11q23 rearrangement are prognostically aligned with normal karyotype, which is prognostically favorable. These findings were incorporated into a refined two-tired cytogenetic-risk stratification: unfavorable and favorable karyotype. The respective 5-year survival rates were 8 and 51% (hazard ratio (HR): 3.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.2-4.3; P<0.0001). Multivariable analysis confirmed the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS)-independent prognostic value of cytogenetic-risk categorization and also identified thrombocytopenia (platelets <100 × 10(9)/l) as another independent predictor of inferior survival (P<0.0001). A similar multivariable analysis showed that karyotype (P=0.001) and platelet count (P=0.04), but not IPSS (P=0.27), predicted leukemia-free survival; the 5-year leukemic transformation rates for unfavorable versus favorable karyotype were 46 and 7% (HR: 5.5, 95% CI: 2.5-12.0; P<0.0001). This study provides the rationale and necessary details for incorporating cytogenetic findings and platelet count in future prognostic models for PMF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.