Consensus proposal for revised International Working Group response criteria for higher risk myelodysplastic syndromes

Author:

Zeidan Amer M.1,Platzbecker Uwe2ORCID,Bewersdorf Jan Philipp3,Stahl Maximilian4,Adès Lionel5ORCID,Borate Uma6,Bowen David T7,Buckstein Rena J.8,Brunner Andrew M.9,Carraway Hetty E10ORCID,Daver Naval G.11ORCID,Díez-Campelo Maria12ORCID,de Witte Theo M13,DeZern Amy E.14,Efficace Fabio15,Garcia-Manero Guillermo16,Garcia Jacqueline S.17ORCID,Germing Ulrich18,Giagounidis Aristoteles19ORCID,Griffiths Elizabeth A20ORCID,Hasserjian Robert P9,Hellström-Lindberg Eva21,Iastrebner Marcelo C22,Komrokji Rami S.23ORCID,Kulasekararaj Austin G24ORCID,Malcovati Luca25ORCID,Miyazaki Yasushi26,Odenike Olatoyosi27,Santini Valeria28ORCID,Sanz Guillermo F.29ORCID,Scheinberg Phillip30ORCID,Stauder Reinhard31ORCID,Van de Loosdrecht Arjan A32,Wei Andrew H33ORCID,Sekeres Mikkael A.34,Fenaux Pierre35

Affiliation:

1. Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

2. University Hospital Leipzig, Department of Hematology and Cell Therapy, Leipzig, Germany

3. Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, United States

4. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, New York, Massachusetts, United States

5. AP-HP, Hôpital Saint Louis and University of Paris, and INSERM U944, Paris, France

6. The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States

7. St. James's Institute of Oncology, United Kingdom

8. Odette Cancer Center, Toronto, Canada

9. Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

10. Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio, United States

11. University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States

12. COMPLEJO ASISTENCIAL UNIVERSITARIO DE SALAMANCA, Salamanca, Spain

13. University Medical Centre Nijmegen, Nijmegen, Netherlands

14. The Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, United States

15. Italian Group for Adult Hematologic Diseases (GIMEMA), Data Center and Health Outcomes Research Unit, Rome, Italy

16. The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas, United States

17. Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts, United States

18. Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Germany

19. Marien Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany

20. Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, New York, United States

21. Karolinska Institutet, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden

22. Sanatorio Universitario Sagrado Corazón, Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina

23. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida, United States

24. King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, United Kingdom

25. University of Pavia & S. Matteo Hospital, Pavia, Italy

26. Atomic Bomb Disease Institute, Ngasaki University, Nagasaki, Japan

27. The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, United States

28. MDS Unit, University of Florence, Florence, Italy

29. Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain and CIBERONC, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Madrid, Spain, Valencia, Spain

30. Hospital A Beneficência Portuguesa, Sao Paulo, Brazil

31. Innsbruck Medical University, Innsbruck, Austria

32. VU University Medical Center, Amsterdam, Netherlands

33. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

34. Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami, Miami, Ohio, United States

35. hôpital St Louis, Paris, PARIS, France

Abstract

Myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) are associated with variable clinical presentations and outcomes. The initial response criteria developed by the International Working Group (IWG) in 2000 have been used in clinical practice, clinical trials, regulatory reviews, and drug labels. While the IWG criteria were revised in 2006 and 2018 (the latter focusing on lower-risk disease), limitations persist in their application to higher-risk MDS and in their ability to fully capture clinical benefits of novel investigational drugs or to serve as valid surrogates for longer-term clinical endpoints (e.g., overall survival). Further, issues related to ambiguity and practicality of some criteria lead to variability in interpretation and inter-observer inconsistency in reporting results from the same sets of data. Thus, we convened an international panel of 36 MDS experts and used an established modified Delphi process to develop consensus recommendations for updated response criteria that would be more reflective of patient-centered and clinically relevant outcomes in higher-risk MDS. Among others, the IWG 2023 criteria include changes in the hemoglobin threshold for complete remission (CR), the introduction of CR with limited count recovery (CRL) and CR with partial hematologic recovery (CRh) as provisional response criteria, elimination of marrow CR, and specific recommendations for standardization of time-to-event endpoints and the derivation and reporting of responses. The updated criteria should lead to better correlation between patient-centered outcomes and clinical trial results in an era of multiple emerging new agents with novel mechanisms of action.

Publisher

American Society of Hematology

Subject

Cell Biology,Hematology,Immunology,Biochemistry

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3