Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40973846›Full record

ArticleAnnals of hematology2025

Treatment persistence and overall survival in myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib were not affected by the covid-19 pandemic, despite the reduced starting dose: Analysis of AIFA registries.

Massimo Breccia, Simone Celant, Francesca Palandri, Francesco Passamonti, Pier Paolo Olimpieri, Valentina Summa, Annalisa Guarcello, Giuseppe Alberto Palumbo, Fabrizio Pane, Paola Guglielmelli and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of hematology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
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

13 authors.

Massimo BrecciaDepartment of Translational and Precision Medicine, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy. breccia@bce.uniroma1.it.
Simone CelantAIFA Italian Medicines Agency, Rome, Italy.
Francesca PalandriIRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Istituto di Ematologia "Seràgnoli", Bologna, Italy.
Francesco PassamontiHematology Division, Foundation IRCCS Ca' Granda Ospedale Maggiore Policlinico, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Pier Paolo OlimpieriAIFA Italian Medicines Agency, Rome, Italy.
Valentina SummaAIFA Italian Medicines Agency, Rome, Italy.
Annalisa GuarcelloAIFA Italian Medicines Agency, Rome, Italy.
Giuseppe Alberto PalumboHematology with BMT Unit, A.O.U., G Rodolico-San Marco University of Catania, Catania, Italy.
Fabrizio PaneUniversità degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Naples, Italy.
Paola GuglielmelliCRIMM, Center Research and Innovation of Myeloproliferative Neoplasms, DMSC, University of Florence, AOU Careggi, Florence, Italy.
Pierluigi ZinzaniIRCCS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Istituto di Ematologia "Seràgnoli", Bologna, Italy.
Paolo CorradiniUniversità degli Studi di Milano & Divisione Ematologia, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milano, Italy.
Pierluigi RussoAIFA Italian Medicines Agency, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We analyzed the outcome of 2229 patients with myelofibrosis (MF) treated with ruxolitinib before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Two populations of MF were defined from the AIFA web monitoring registries: the pre-COVID-19 (1703, 76.4%) and the post-COVID-19 (526, 23.6%) cohorts. The two populations were balanced using the Inversity Probability of Treatment Weighting. The median age was 69 years and 73 years in the pre- and post- COVID-19 era, respectively. There were no differences in spleen diameters at baseline prior to ruxolitinib in the two groups, but a difference in median spleen volume was noted (961 cm3 in the pre-era and 788.3 cm3 in the post-era). Overall, intermediate-2 IPSS risk were 67.2% in the pre- and 72% in the post-era, whereas the high-risk category was 32.7% and 27.9%, respectively. More patients started on a reduced dose in the post-COVID-19 era (73.5% versus 65% in the pre-era). After adjusting for the differences, an analysis of overall survival revealed no differences between the two groups (HR 0.875, p > 0.05). Patients who started ruxolitinib after COVID-19 had similar probability to stop treatment in the follow-up (HR 0.956, p > 0.05). The results indicate that COVID-19 did not affect the duration of treatment and the relative OS.

Indexed as

COVID-19Primary MyelofibrosisPyrazolesAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNitrilesPyrimidinesRegistriesSARS-CoV-2Treatment OutcomeNitrilesPyrazolesPyrimidinesruxolitinibCOVID-19MyelofibrosisOverall survivalRuxolitinibStarting dose

Identifiers

PMID40973846
PMCPMC12552246

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.