All content on this site is intended for healthcare professionals only. By acknowledging this message and accessing the information on this website you are confirming that you are a Healthcare Professional. If you are a patient or carer, please visit the MPN Advocates Network.
Introducing
Now you can personalise
your MPN Hub experience!
Bookmark content to read later
Select your specific areas of interest
View content recommended for you
Find out moreThe MPN Hub website uses a third-party service provided by Google that dynamically translates web content. Translations are machine generated, so may not be an exact or complete translation, and the MPN Hub cannot guarantee the accuracy of translated content. The MPN Hub and its employees will not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages (even if foreseeable) resulting from use of the Google Translate feature. For further support with Google Translate, visit Google Translate Help.
Increased risk of thrombotic events is an established feature of Philadelphia-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN), including essential thrombocythemia (ET), polycythemia vera (PV), and primary myelofibrosis.1 However, this increased risk of thrombotic events has not yet been recognized in secondary myelofibrosis (SMF) that occurs post PV (PPV-MF) or ET (PET-MF).
Establishing any increased risk of thrombotic events in patients with SMF would rationalize active treatment of the condition, given the significant morbidity and mortality that can accompany thrombotic events. However, as potential cytoreductive therapy carries its own risk of adverse events and toxicities, research into the area is needed to inform decisions about disease versus treatment risk in patients with SMF.1
The MPN Hub has previously discussed a prognostic model of SMF from the Myelofibrosis Secondary to PV and ET (MYSEC) project. Here, we summarize findings relating to thrombosis risk from the MYSEC project database, the largest retrospective study to only include patients with SMF. Published in Leukemia in August 2022, Mora et al.1 investigated the potential need to consider treatment of some patients with SMF to protect them from thrombotic events.
As of June 2021, the European MYSEC database had registered 12,58 patients with SMF who were diagnosed between 1981 and 2020 across 19 centers. Patient records were checked for thrombotic events, which were defined as:
Using demographic and clinical data, univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for thrombotic events, including venous and arterial, in patients with SMF.
Among all patients, the median follow-up was 3.5 years (range, 1–21.5 years), and 615 had PPV-MF and 643 had PET-MF. The clinical characteristics of all patients are shown in Table 1. In total, 135 patients (10.7%) had experienced a thrombotic event and thrombotic events accounted for 2.5% of all reported causes of death. At the point of data cut-off, 48% of patients had died, with a mortality rate of 9.4% patients per year.
Table 1. Clinical characteristics of all patients included from the MYSEC database*
Characteristic, % (unless otherwise stated) |
SMF |
PPV-MF |
PET-MF |
p value† |
---|---|---|---|---|
Median age at SMF (range), years |
64 (20–95) |
65 (33–95) |
64 (20–93) |
0.001 |
Median duration of PV/ET (range), years |
11.2 (1–41.4) |
11.4 (1–41.4) |
11.0 (1–39.3) |
0.66‡ |
Median Hb (range), g/dL |
11.1 (4.2–16.0) |
11.9 (6.3–16.0) |
10.6 (4.2–16.0) |
<0.0001‡ |
Hb <10 g/dL |
30.3 |
22.4 |
37.7 |
<0.0001 |
Hb <8 g/dL, |
5.2 |
2.9 |
7.3 |
0.001 |
Median PLT (range), ×109/L |
327 (7–1,908) |
271 (7–1,689) |
375 (25–1,908) |
<0.0001‡ |
PLT 50–100 × 109/L |
6.6 |
8.9 |
4.4 |
0.002 |
PLT <50 × 109/L |
2.9 |
4.3 |
1.5 |
0.003 |
Median WBC count (range), × 109/L |
10.1 (0.4–121.5) |
12.8 (0.6–121.5) |
8.1 (0.4–90) |
<0.0001‡ |
WBC count >11 × 109/L |
45.9 |
57.7 |
34.6 |
<0.0001 |
Median spleen length (range), cm from LCM |
6 (0–34) |
8.0 (0–34) |
4.0 (0–26) |
<0.0001‡ |
Spleen length <5 cm from LCM |
45.0 |
32.9 |
56.6 |
<0.0001 |
Spleen length 5–10 cm from LCM |
30.1 |
34.8 |
25.7 |
0.0004 |
Spleen length >10 cm from LCM |
24.9 |
32.4 |
17.7 |
<0.0001 |
Constitutional symptoms |
39.0 |
44.7 |
33.4 |
<0.0001 |
JAK inhibitors at baseline |
16.2 |
22.5 |
10.3 |
<0.0001 |
Anti-platelets at diagnosis |
50.8 |
55.3 |
46.3 |
0.003 |
Previous thrombosis |
22.2 |
25.7 |
18.8 |
0.003 |
Previous thrombosis; venous |
48.7 |
63.5 |
36.5 |
0.02 |
Allogeneic SCT |
12.2 |
10.0 |
14.4 |
0.05 |
MYSEC-PM low-intermediate 1 |
66.2 |
60.3 |
72.0 |
<0.0001 |
MYSEC-PM intermediate 2-high |
33.8 |
39.7 |
28.0 |
<0.0001 |
Abnormal cytogenetics |
36.7 |
41.9 |
31.9 |
0.02 |
ET,essential thrombocythemia; Hb, hemoglobin; LCM, left costal margin; MYSEC-PM, Myelofibrosis Secondary to PV and ET prognostic model; PET-MF, post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis; PLT, platelets; PPV-MF, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis; PV, polycythemia vera; SCT, stem cell transplant; SMF, secondary myelofibrosis; WBC, white blood cell. |
The prevalence of overall, venous, and arterial thrombotic events in patients with SMF, PPV-MF, and PET-MF can be seen in Table 2. Of the thrombotic events recorded, 51.3% were arterial and 48.7% were venous. The most common venous thrombotic events were deep and superficial vein thrombosis (40.5% and 34.5%, respectively), with myocardial infarction (41.7%) and ischemic stroke (27%) the most common arterial thrombotic events.
Table 2. Incidence of thrombotic events in patients with SMF, PPV-MF and PET-MF (per year)*
Incidence of thrombotic events per year, % (95% CI) |
SMF |
PPV-MF |
PET-MF |
---|---|---|---|
All thrombotic events |
2.3 (1.9–2.7) |
2.7 (2.2–3.4) |
1.9 (1.1–2.4) |
Venous thrombotic events |
1.4 (1.1–1.7) |
1.6 (1.1–2.1) |
1.2 (0.6–2.4) |
Arterial thrombotic events |
0.77 (0.6–1.0) |
0.9 (0.6–1.3) |
0.7 (0.3–1.7) |
CI, confidence interval; PET-MF, post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis; PPV-MF, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis; SMF, secondary myelofibrosis. |
Previous venous thrombotic events were more strongly associated with PPV-MF than PET-MF (63.5% vs 36.5%; p = 0.02). No thrombotic event progressed within 90 days of first recognition. Overall, 22.2% of patients had experienced a thrombotic event before evolving to SMF, of which 25.7% had PV and 18.8% had ET at the time of the event, the remainder having no hematologic disease.
Univariate and multivariate analyses demonstrated several factors predictive of first venous or arterial thrombotic event following progression to SMF (e.g., previous history of thrombotic event), while others were protective.
Regardless of death from any cause, cytoreductive therapy at baseline was protective against both arterial (subdistribution HR [sHR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.36–5.55; p = 0.11) and venous (sHR, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.25–0.97; p = 0.04) thrombotic events. Conversely, previous history of venous thrombotic events during PV/ET was predictive of further venous thrombosis (sHR, 3.28; 95% CI, 1.58–6.78; p < 0.001), but not arterial thrombosis (p = 0.49).
Thrombosis is a real risk for patients with MPN. Previous history of thrombotic events is strongly predictive of further events in patients with MPN, and consideration of this risk factor must be addressed in the clinical assessment and history taking of this group of patients. This study has identified that patients receiving cytoreductive therapy at the point of evolving to SMF have fewer thrombotic events than patients not on treatment, suggesting that there is potential utility for the use of cytoreductive therapy for preventing thrombosis in SMF, alongside managing hemodynamic features of the disease, such as blood counts and splenomegaly.
Your opinion matters
Subscribe to get the best content related to MPN delivered to your inbox