OBJECTIVE: Current guidelines for essential thrombocythemia (ET) patients recommend different treatment approaches based on thrombosis risk stratification models. However, these recommendations may not be applicable to some patients under real clinical settings. Therefore, we carried out a retrospective real-world validation study.
METHODS: Thrombosis-free survival (TFS) was compared between treatment naïve ET patients receiving different treatment approaches. ET patients were stratified by three representative risk models, the conventional, the International Prognostic Score for thrombosis in ET (IPSET-thrombosis), and revised IPSET-thrombosis. Treatment decisions were largely made by individual physicians, taking into account patient preferences and backgrounds.
RESULTS: A total of 179 ET patients were included, and thrombotic events were observed in 26 patients. TFS was significantly longer in high-risk patients of all risk models receiving a combination of cytoreductive therapy (CRT) and antiplatelet therapy (APT) compared to CRT alone. Similar results were seen in intermediate-risk patients stratified by IPSET-thrombosis. In contrast, in very low- and low-risk patients of all risk models, TFS was not affected by addition of CRT, indicating that observation or APT alone is an appropriate treatment approach for these patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrate that current guidelines provide optimal treatment approaches for Japanese ET patients under real-world clinical settings.

The discovery that Philadelphia-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) present with several molecular abnormalities, including the mostly represented JAK2V617F mutation, opened new horizons in the diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of these disorders. However, the great strides in the knowledge on molecular genetics need parallel progresses on the best approach to methods for detecting and reporting disease-associated mutations, and to shape the most effective and rationale testing pathway in the diagnosis, prognosis and monitoring of MPNs. The MPN taskforce of the Italian Society of Hematology (SIE) assessed the scientific literature and composed a framework of the best, possibly evidence-based, recommendations for optimal molecular methods as well as insights about the applicability and interpretation of those tests in the clinical practice, and clinical decision for testing MPNs patients. The issues dealt with: source of samples and nucleic acid template, the most appropriate molecular abnormalities and related detection methods required for diagnosis, prognosis, and monitoring of MPNs, how to report a diagnostic molecular test, calibration and quality control. For each of these issues, practice recommendations were provided.

The current consensus on the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of essential thrombocythemia (ET) is based on experts\' recommendations. However, several aspects of the diagnosis of, prognosis of, and therapy for ET are still controversial. The Delphi method was employed with an expert panel of members of the Spanish Group of Ph-negative Myeloproliferative Neoplasms in order to identify the degree of agreement on the diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment of ET. Nine leading experts selected a total of 41 clinical hematologists with well-known expertise in ET. An electronic questionnaire was used to collect the questions rated in a four-step scale. The questions were grouped into four blocks: diagnosis, risk stratification, goals of therapy, and treatment strategy. After the first round consisting of 80 questions, a second round including 14 additional questions focused on the recommendations advocated by experts of the European LeukemiaNet in 2011 was analyzed. The median and mean values for the first and second rounds were calculated. A summary of the conclusions considered as the most representative of each block of questions is presented. The Delphi method is a powerful instrument to address the current approaches and controversies surrounding ET.

According to the 2008 revision of the World Health Organization (WHO) classification of myeloid malignancies, philadelphia chromosome (Ph)-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) include clonal, hematologic disorders such as polycythemia vera, primary myelofibrosis, and essential thrombocythemia.Recent years have witnessed major advances in the understanding of the molecular pathophysiology of these rare subgroups of chronic, myeloproliferative disorders. Identification of somatic mutations in genes associated with pathogenesis and evolution of these myeloproliferative conditions (Janus Kinase 2; myeloproliferative leukemia virus gene; calreticulin) led to substantial changes in the international guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of Ph-negative MPN during the last few years.The MPN-Working Group (MPN-WG), a panel of hematologists with expertise in MPN diagnosis and treatment from various parts of India, examined applicability of this latest clinical and scientific evidence in the context of hematology practice in India.This manuscript summarizes the consensus recommendations formulated by the MPN-WG that can be followed as a guideline for management of patients with Ph-negative MPN in the context of clinical practice in India.

This article presents the results of group discussion among experts from SIE, SIES and GITMO societies aimed at highlighting unmet challenges in the management of Ph-neg myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). The issues analyzed were: diagnosis of prefibrotic myelofibrosis; diagnosis of Ph-neg MPNs in the setting of splanchnic vein thrombosis (SVT); management of low-risk PV and low-risk ET patients with JAK2V617F mutation; molecular biomarkers in the prognostic evaluation of myelofibrosis (MF); ruxolitinib therapy in low-risk MF; therapy in patients with SVT-associated Ph-neg MPN; indications of splenectomy in MF. For each of these issues, proposals for advancement in clinical research were addressed.