Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36556033›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Prediction of Survival and Prognosis Migration from Gold-Standard Scores in Myelofibrosis Patients Treated with Ruxolitinib Applying the RR6 Prognostic Model in a Monocentric Real-Life Setting.

Andrea Duminuco, Antonella Nardo, Bruno Garibaldi, Calogero Vetro, Anna Longo, Cesarina Giallongo, Francesco Di Raimondo, Giuseppe A Palumbo

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing papers in PubMed
2.1field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

11 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Review
  6. Emerging Therapeutic Approaches for Anemia in Myelofibrosis.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2025
    Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Journal of clinical medicine · 2023
    Article
  11. Polycythemia Vera: Barriers to and Strategies for Optimal Management.Blood and lymphatic cancer : targets and therapy · 2023
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Andrea DuminucoPostgraduate School of Hematology, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9510-4755
Antonella NardoPostgraduate School of Hematology, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Bruno GaribaldiPostgraduate School of Hematology, University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Calogero VetroHematology Unit with BMT, A.O.U. Policlinico "G. Rodolico-San Marco", Via S. Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1922-5157
Anna LongoHematology Unit with BMT, A.O.U. Policlinico "G. Rodolico-San Marco", Via S. Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Cesarina GiallongoDipartimento di Scienze Mediche, Chirurgiche e Tecnologie Avanzate "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Francesco Di RaimondoHematology Unit with BMT, A.O.U. Policlinico "G. Rodolico-San Marco", Via S. Sofia 78, 95123 Catania, Italy.
Giuseppe A PalumboDipartimento di Scienze Mediche, Chirurgiche e Tecnologie Avanzate "G.F. Ingrassia", University of Catania, 95123 Catania, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1859-6319
University of Catania · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The wide use of ruxolitinib, approved for treating primary and secondary myelofibrosis (MF), has revolutionized the landscape of these diseases. This molecule can reduce spleen volume and constitutional symptoms, guaranteeing patients a better quality of life and survival or even a valid bridge to bone marrow transplantation. Despite a rapid response within the first 3 to 6 months of treatment, some patients fail to achieve a significant benefit or lose early response. After ruxolitinib failure, new drugs are available to provide an additional therapeutic option for these patients. However, the correct timing point for deciding on a therapy shift is still an open challenge. Recently, a clinical prognostic score named RR6 (Response to Ruxolitinib after 6 months) was proposed to determine survival after 6 months of treatment with ruxolitinib in patients affected by MF. We applied this model to a cohort of consecutive patients treated at our center to validate the results obtained in terms of median overall survival (mOS): for the low-risk class, mOS was not reached (as in the training cohort); for the intermediate-risk, mOS was 52 months (95% CI 39-106); for the high-risk, it was 33 (95% 8.5-59). Moreover, in addition to the other studies present in the literature, we evaluated how the new RR6 score could better identify primary MF patients at high risk, with a slight or no agreement compared to DIPSS, contrary to what occurs in secondary MF. Thus, we were able to confirm the predictive power of the RR6 model in our series, which might be of help in guiding future therapeutic choices.

Indexed as

model validationmyelofibrosisoverall survivalRR6 prognostic scoreruxolitinib

Identifiers

PMID36556033
PMCPMC9783796
OpenAlexW4311598073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.