Novel strategies for challenging scenarios encountered in managing myelofibrosis

References

• Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):799–807.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison C, Kiladjian JJ, Al-Ali HK, et al. JAK inhibition with ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):787–798.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Gupta V, et al. Effect of ruxolitinib therapy on myelofibrosis-related symptoms and other patient-reported outcomes in COMFORT-I: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(10):1285–1292.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, et al. The clinical benefit of ruxolitinib across patient subgroups: analysis of a placebo-controlled, phase III study in patients with myelofibrosis. Br J Haematol. 2013;161(4):508–516.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Gotlib J, Mesa RA, et al. Long-term survival in patients treated with ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis: COMFORT-I and -II pooled analyses. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10(1):156.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guglielmelli P, Ghirardi A, Carobbio A, et al. Impact of ruxolitinib on survival of patients with myelofibrosis in real world – update of ernest (european registry for myeloproliferative neoplasms) study. Hemasphere. 2021;5:S158.
   Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, et al. Long-term treatment with ruxolitinib for patients with myelofibrosis: 5-year update from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 COMFORT-I trial. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10(1):0417-z.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Vannucchi AM, Kiladjian JJ, et al. Long-term findings from COMFORT-II, a phase 3 study of ruxolitinib vs best available therapy for myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2016;30(8):1701–1707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pardanani A, Harrison C, Cortes JE, et al. Safety and efficacy of fedratinib in patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(5):643–651.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Schaap N, Vannucchi AM, et al. Janus kinase-2 inhibitor fedratinib in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib (JAKARTA-2): a single-arm, open-label, non-randomised, phase 2, multicentre study. Lancet Haematol. 2017;4(7):e317–e324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Schaap N, Vannucchi AM, et al. Fedratinib in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib: an updated analysis of the JAKARTA2 study using stringent criteria for ruxolitinib failure. Am J Hematol. 2020;95(6):594–603.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Dupriez B, Pereira A, et al. New prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis based on a study of the international working group for myelofibrosis research and treatment. Blood. 2009;113(13):2895–2901.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Passamonti F, Cervantes F, Vannucchi AM, et al. A dynamic prognostic model to predict survival in primary myelofibrosis: a study by the IWG-MRT (international working group for myeloproliferative neoplasms research and treatment). Blood. 2010;115(9):1703–1708.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gangat N, Caramazza D, Vaidya R, et al. DIPSS plus: a refined dynamic international prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis that incorporates prognostic information from karyotype, platelet count, and transfusion status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(4):392–397.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guglielmelli P, Lasho TL, Rotunno G, et al. MIPSS70: mutation-enhanced international prognostic score system for transplantation-age patients with primary myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;2017:JCO2017764886.
   Google Scholar
• Nicolosi M, Mudireddy M, Lasho TL, et al. Sex and degree of severity influence the prognostic impact of anemia in primary myelofibrosis: analysis based on 1109 consecutive patients. Leukemia. 2018;32(5):1254–1258.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuykendall AT, Shah S, Talati C, et al. Between a rux and a hard place: evaluating salvage treatment and outcomes in myelofibrosis after ruxolitinib discontinuation. Ann Hematol. 2018;97(3):435–441.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Kantarjian HM, Estrov Z, et al. Long-term outcomes of 107 patients with myelofibrosis receiving JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib: survival advantage in comparison to matched historical controls. Blood. 2012;120(6):1202–1209.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vannucchi AM, Kantarjian HM, Kiladjian JJ, et al. A pooled analysis of overall survival in COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II, 2 randomized phase 3 trials of ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2015;100(9):1139–1145.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Miller CB, Komrokji RS, Mesa RA, et al. Practical measures of clinical benefit with ruxolitinib therapy: an exploratory analysis of COMFORT-I. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2017;17(8):479–487.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Al-Ali HK, Stalbovskaya V, Gopalakrishna P, et al. Impact of ruxolitinib treatment on the hemoglobin dynamics and the negative prognosis of anemia in patients with myelofibrosis. Leuk Lymphoma. 2016;57(10):2464–2467.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gupta V, Harrison C, Hexner EO, et al. The impact of anemia on overall survival in patients with myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib in the COMFORT studies. Haematologica. 2016;101(12):e482–e484.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Alvarez-Larran A, Hernandez-Boluda JC, et al. Erythropoietin treatment of the anaemia of myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia: results in 20 patients and review of the literature. Br J Haematol. 2004;127(4):399–403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Alvarez-Larran A, Hernandez-Boluda JC, et al. Darbepoetin-alpha for the anaemia of myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia. Br J Haematol. 2006;134(2):184–186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Alvarez-Larran A, Domingo A, et al. Efficacy and tolerability of danazol as a treatment for the anaemia of myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia: long-term results in 30 patients. Br J Haematol. 2005;129(6):771–775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Isola IM, Alvarez-Larran A, et al. Danazol therapy for the anemia of myelofibrosis: assessment of efficacy with current criteria of response and long-term results. Ann Hematol. 2015;94(11):1791–1796.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Marchetti M, Barosi G, Balestri F, et al. Low-dose thalidomide ameliorates cytopenias and splenomegaly in myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia: a phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(3):424–431.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tefferi A, Cortes J, Verstovsek S, et al. Lenalidomide therapy in myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia. Blood. 2006;108(4):1158–1164.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gowin K, Kosiorek H, Dueck A, et al. Multicenter phase 2 study of combination therapy with ruxolitinib and danazol in patients with myelofibrosis. Leuk Res. 2017;60:31–35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malak S, Cony-Makhoul P, Ianotto J, et al. Efficacy and safety of erythropoietic-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis patients: a retrospective analysis on 45 patients. on behalf of the french intergroup of myeloproliferative disorders (FIM). Blood. 2016;128(22):3123–3123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rampal RK, Verstovsek S, Devlin SM, et al. Safety and efficacy of combined ruxolitinib and thalidomide in patients with myelofibrosis: a phase II study. Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):4163–4163.
   Google Scholar
• Cervantes F, Ross DM, Radinoff A, et al. Efficacy and safety of a novel dosing strategy for ruxolitinib in the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis and anemia: the REALISE phase 2 study. Leukemia. 2021;2021:261.
   Google Scholar
• Talpaz M, Erickson-Viitanen S, Hou K, et al. Evaluation of an alternative ruxolitinib dosing regimen in patients with myelofibrosis: an open-label phase 2 study. J Hematol Oncol. 2018;11(1):101.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fenaux P, Kiladjian JJ, Platzbecker U. Luspatercept for the treatment of anemia in myelodysplastic syndromes and primary myelofibrosis. Blood. 2019;133(8):790–794.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gale RP, Barosi G, Barbui T, et al. What are RBC-transfusion-dependence and -independence? Leuk Res. 2011;35(1):8–11.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerds AT, Vannucchi AM, Passamonti F, et al. A phase 2 study of luspatercept in patients with myelofibrosis-associated anemia. Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):557–557.
   Google Scholar
• Gerds AT, Vannucchi AM, Passamonti F, et al. Duration of response to luspatercept in patients (pts) requiring red blood cell (RBC) transfusions with myelofibrosis (MF)-updated data from the phase 2 ACE-536-MF-001 study. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):47–48.
   Google Scholar
• Bose P, Pemmaraju N, Masarova L, et al. Sotatercept (ACE-011) for anemia of myelofibrosis: a phase 2 study. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):10–11.
   Google Scholar
• Asshoff M, Petzer V, Warr MR, et al. Momelotinib inhibits ACVR1/ALK2, decreases hepcidin production and ameliorates anemia of chronic disease in rodents. Blood. 2017;129(13):1823–1830.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oh ST, Talpaz M, Gerds AT, et al. ACVR1/JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor momelotinib reverses transfusion dependency and suppresses hepcidin in myelofibrosis phase 2 trial. Blood Adv. 2020;4(18):4282–4291.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesa RA, Kiladjian JJ, Catalano JV, et al. SIMPLIFY-1: a phase III randomized trial of momelotinib versus ruxolitinib in janus kinase inhibitor-naive patients with myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(34):3844–3850.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Vannucchi AM, Platzbecker U, et al. Momelotinib versus best available therapy in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib (SIMPLIFY 2): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2018;5(2):e73–e81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Egyed M, Lech-Marańda E, et al. Robust overall survival and sustained efficacy outcomes during long term exposure to momelotinib in JAK inhibitor naïve and previously JAK inhibitor treated intermediate/high risk myelofibrosis patients. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):51–52.
   Google Scholar
• Mesa RA, Oh S, Gerds AT, et al. Transfusion independence is associated with improved overall survival in myelofibrosis patients receiving momelotinib. Hemasphere. 2021;5:S202.
   Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Chen CC, Egyed M, et al. MOMENTUM: Momelotinib vs danazol in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with JAKi who are symptomatic and anemic. Future Oncol. 2021;17(12):1449–1458.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Kremyanskaya M, Mascarenhas JO, et al. Pelabresib (cpi-0610) improved anemia associated with myelofibrosis: interim results from manifest phase 2 study. Hemasphere. 2021;5:EP1077.
   Google Scholar
• Passamonti F, Giorgino T, Mora B, et al. A clinical-molecular prognostic model to predict survival in patients with post polycythemia vera and post essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2017;31(12):2726–2731.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam CS, Kantarjian H, Cortes J, et al. Dynamic model for predicting death within 12 months in patients with primary or post-polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5587–5593.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talpaz M, Paquette R, Afrin L, et al. Interim analysis of safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts. J Hematol Oncol. 2013;6(1):6–81.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Vannucchi AM, Te Boekhorst PAW, Harrison CN, et al. EXPAND, a dose-finding study of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts: 48-week follow-up analysis. Haematologica. 2019;104(5):947–954.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Schaap N, Vannucchi AM, et al. Fedratinib induces spleen responses and reduces symptom burden in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN)-associated myelofibrosis (MF) and low platelet counts, who were either ruxolitinib-naïve or were previously treated with ruxolitinib. Blood. 2019;134(Supplement_1):668–668.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mesa RA, Steensma DP, Pardanani A, et al. A phase 2 trial of combination low-dose thalidomide and prednisone for the treatment of myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia. Blood. 2003;101(7):2534–2541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mesa RA, Elliott MA, Schroeder G, et al. Durable responses to thalidomide-based drug therapy for myelofibrosis with myeloid metaplasia. Mayo Clin Proc. 2004;79(7):883–889.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Weinkove R, Reilly JT, McMullin MF, et al. Low-dose thalidomide in myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2008;93(7):1100–1101.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascarenhas J, Kosiorek HE, Varricchio L, et al. Rationale for and results of a phase I study of the TGF-β 1/3 inhibitor AVID200 in subjects with myelofibrosis: MPN-RC 118 trial. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):6–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Singer JW, Al-Fayoumi S, Ma H, et al. Comprehensive kinase profile of pacritinib, a nonmyelosuppressive janus kinase 2 inhibitor. J Exp Pharmacol. 2016;8:11–19.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Mesa RA, Vannucchi AM, Mead A, et al. Pacritinib versus best available therapy for the treatment of myelofibrosis irrespective of baseline cytopenias (PERSIST-1): an international, randomised, phase 3 trial. Lancet Haematol. 2017;4(5):e225–e236.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascarenhas J, Hoffman R, Talpaz M, et al. Pacritinib vs best available therapy, including ruxolitinib, in patients with myelofibrosis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(5):652–659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerds AT, Savona MR, Scott BL, et al. Determining the recommended dose of pacritinib: results from the PAC203 dose-finding trial in advanced myelofibrosis. Blood Adv. 2020;4(22):5825–5835.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Singer JW, Fleischman A, Al-Fayoumi S, et al. Inhibition of interleukin-1 receptor-associated kinase 1 (IRAK1) as a therapeutic strategy. Oncotarget. 2018;9(70):33416–33439.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marcellino BK, Verstovsek S, Mascarenhas J. The myelodepletive phenotype in myelofibrosis: clinical relevance and therapeutic implication. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2020;20(7):415–421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barosi G, Klersy C, Villani L, et al. JAK2(V617F) allele burden ⩾50% is associated with response to ruxolitinib in persons with MPN-associated myelofibrosis and splenomegaly requiring therapy. Leukemia. 2016;30(8):1772–1775.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tremblay D, Mesa R, Scott B, et al. Pacritinib demonstrates spleen volume reduction in patients with myelofibrosis independent of JAK2V617F allele burden. Blood Adv. 2020;4:5929–5935.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guglielmelli P, Barosi G, Specchia G, et al. Identification of patients with poorer survival in primary myelofibrosis based on the burden of JAK2V617F mutated allele. Blood. 2009;114(8):1477–1483.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rozovski U, Verstovsek S, Manshouri T, et al. An accurate, simple prognostic model consisting of age, JAK2, CALR, and MPL mutation status for patients with primary myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2017;102(1):79–84.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tefferi A, Lasho TL, Huang J, et al. Low JAK2V617F allele burden in primary myelofibrosis, compared to either a higher allele burden or unmutated status, is associated with inferior overall and leukemia-free survival. Leukemia. 2008;22(4):756–761.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez-Boluda JC, Correa JG, Alvarez-Larran A, et al. Clinical characteristics, prognosis and treatment of myelofibrosis patients with severe thrombocytopenia. Br J Haematol. 2018;181(3):397–400.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiladjian JJ, Platzbecker U, Mayer J, et al. Momelotinib’s spleen, symptom and anemia efficacy is maintained in intermediate/high risk myelofibrosis patients with thrombocytopenia. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):43–44.
   Google Scholar
• Palandri F, Palumbo GA, Bonifacio M, et al. Durability of spleen response affects the outcome of ruxolitinib-treated patients with myelofibrosis: results from a multicentre study on 284 patients. Leuk Res. 2018;74:86–88.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Kantarjian H, Mesa RA, et al. Safety and efficacy of INCB018424, a JAK1 and JAK2 inhibitor, in myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2010;363(12):1117–1127.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saenz DT, Fiskus W, Manshouri T, et al. BET protein bromodomain inhibitor-based combinations are highly active against post-myeloproliferative neoplasm secondary AML cells. Leukemia. 2017;31(3):678–687.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleppe M, Koche R, Zou L, et al. Dual targeting of oncogenic activation and inflammatory signaling increases therapeutic efficacy in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Cancer Cell. 2018;33(1):29–43.e7.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petiti J, Lo Iacono M, Rosso V, et al. Bcl-xL represents a therapeutic target in philadelphia negative myeloproliferative neoplasms. J Cell Mol Med. 2020;24(18):10978–10986.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Waibel M, Solomon VS, Knight DA, et al. Combined targeting of JAK2 and bcl-2/Bcl-xL to cure mutant JAK2-driven malignancies and overcome acquired resistance to JAK2 inhibitors. Cell Rep. 2013;5(4):1047–1059.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiskus W, Verstovsek S, Manshouri T, et al. Dual PI3K/AKT/mTOR inhibitor BEZ235 synergistically enhances the activity of JAK2 inhibitor against cultured and primary human myeloproliferative neoplasm cells. Mol Cancer Ther. 2013;12(5):577–588.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bogani C, Bartalucci N, Martinelli S, et al. mTOR inhibitors alone and in combination with JAK2 inhibitors effectively inhibit cells of myeloproliferative neoplasms. PLoS One. 2013;8(1):e54826.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rampal R, Pinzon-Ortiz M, Varshini HSA, et al. Synergistic therapeutic efficacy of combined JAK1/2, pan-PIM, and CDK4/6 inhibition in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. 2016;128(22):634–634.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhagwat N, Koppikar P, Keller M, et al. Improved targeting of JAK2 leads to increased therapeutic efficacy in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. 2014;123(13):2075–2083.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fiskus W, Verstovsek S, Manshouri T, et al. Heat shock protein 90 inhibitor is synergistic with JAK2 inhibitor and overcomes resistance to JAK2-TKI in human myeloproliferative neoplasm cells. Clin Cancer Res. 2011;17(23):7347–7358.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKenney AS, Lau AN, Somasundara AVH, et al. JAK2/IDH-mutant-driven myeloproliferative neoplasm is sensitive to combined targeted inhibition. J Clin Invest. 2018;128(2):789–804.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stivala S, Codilupi T, Brkic S, et al. Targeting compensatory MEK/ERK activation increases JAK inhibitor efficacy in myeloproliferative neoplasms. J Clin Invest. 2019;129(4):1596–1611.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nieborowska-Skorska M, Maifrede S, Dasgupta Y, et al. Ruxolitinib-induced defects in DNA repair cause sensitivity to PARP inhibitors in myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. 2017;130(26):2848–2859.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzacurati L, Lambert QT, Pradhan A, et al. The PIM inhibitor AZD1208 synergizes with ruxolitinib to induce apoptosis of ruxolitinib sensitive and resistant JAK2-V617F-driven cells and inhibit colony formation of primary MPN cells. Oncotarget. 2015;6(37):40141–40157.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mazzacurati L, Collins RJ, Pandey G, et al. The pan-PIM inhibitor INCB053914 displays potent synergy in combination with ruxolitinib in models of MPN. Blood Adv. 2019;3(22):3503–3514.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang Y, Fiskus W, Chong DG, et al. Cotreatment with panobinostat and JAK2 inhibitor TG101209 attenuates JAK2V617F levels and signaling and exerts synergistic cytotoxic effects against human myeloproliferative neoplastic cells. Blood. 2009;114(24):5024–5033.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bhagwat N, Keller MD, Rampal RK, et al. Improved efficacy of combination of JAK2 and hedgehog inhibitors in myelofibrosis. Blood. 2013;122(21):666–666.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Mascarenhas JO, Kremyanskaya M, et al. CPI-0610, bromodomain and extraterminal domain protein (BET) inhibitor, as “add-on” to ruxolitinib, in advanced myelofibrosis patients with suboptimal response: update of MANIFEST phase 2 study. Blood. 2020;136:56.
   Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Garcia JS, Somervaille TCP, et al. Navitoclax and ruxolitinib for patients with myelofibrosis and jak inhibitor experience: response duration in phase 2 study. Hemasphere. 2021;5:EP1078.
   Google Scholar
• Rampal R, Al-Shahrour F, Abdel-Wahab O, et al. Integrated genomic analysis illustrates the Central role of JAK-STAT pathway activation in myeloproliferative neoplasm pathogenesis. Blood. 2014;123(22):e123–e133.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mason KD, Carpinelli MR, Fletcher JI, et al. Programmed anuclear cell death delimits platelet life span. Cell. 2007;128(6):1173–1186.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pemmaraju N, Garcia JS, Potluri J, et al. The addition of navitoclax to ruxolitinib demonstrates efficacy within different high-risk populations in patients with Relapsed/Refractory myelofibrosis. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):49–50.
   Google Scholar
• Yacoub A, Borate U, Rampal RK, et al. Add-on parsaclisib (a pi3k-Delta inhibitor) in patients with myelofibrosis and suboptimal response to ruxolitinib: interim analysis from a phase 2 study. Hemasphere. 2021;5:EP1075.
   Google Scholar
• Yacoub A, Wang ES, Rampal RK, et al. Addition of parsaclisib, a pi3kdelta inhibitor, in patients (pts) with suboptimal response to ruxolitinib (rux): a phase 2 study in pts with myelofibrosis (MF). Haemasphere. 2020;4:S216.
   Google Scholar
• Bose P, Swaminathan M, Pemmaraju N, et al. A phase 2 study of pracinostat combined with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis. Leuk Lymphoma. 2019;2019:1–8.
   Google Scholar
• Gupta V, Harrison CN, Hasselbalch HC, et al. Phase 1b/2 study of the efficacy and safety of sonidegib (LDE225) in combination with ruxolitinib (INC424) in patients with myelofibrosis. Blood. 2015;126(23):825–825.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascarenhas J, Marcellino BK, Lu M, et al. A phase I study of panobinostat and ruxolitinib in patients with primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and post-polycythemia vera/essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (post-PV/ET MF). Leuk Res. 2020;88:106272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durrant ST, Nagler A, Guglielmelli P, et al. Results from HARMONY: an open-label, multicentre, 2-arm, phase 1b, dose-finding study assessing the safety and efficacy of the oral combination of ruxolitinib and buparlisib in patients with myelofibrosis. Haematologica. 2019;104(12):e551–e554.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masarova L, Verstovsek S, Hidalgo-Lopez JE, et al. A phase 2 study of ruxolitinib in combination with azacitidine in patients with myelofibrosis. Blood. 2018;132(16):1664–1674.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kremyanskaya M, Mascarenhas JO, Patriarca A, et al. Clinical benefit of pelabresib (cpi-0610) in combination with ruxolitinib in jak inhibitor treatment naïve myelofibrosis patients: interim efficacy subgroup analysis from arm 3 of manifest ph2 study. Hemasphere. 2021;5:EP1085.
   Google Scholar
• Bose P, Verstovsek S. Management of myelofibrosis after ruxolitinib failure. Leuk Lymphoma. 2020;2020:1–13.
   Google Scholar
• Bose P, Verstovsek S. SOHO state of the art updates and next questions: identifying and treating “progression” in myelofibrosis. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2021;21(10):641–649.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Newberry KJ, Patel K, Masarova L, et al. Clonal evolution and outcomes in myelofibrosis after ruxolitinib discontinuation. Blood. 2017;130(9):1125–1131.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palandri F, Breccia M, Bonifacio M, et al. Life after ruxolitinib: reasons for discontinuation, impact of disease phase, and outcomes in 218 patients with myelofibrosis. Cancer. 2020;126(6):1243–1252.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koppikar P, Bhagwat N, Kilpivaara O, et al. Heterodimeric JAK-STAT activation as a mechanism of persistence to JAK2 inhibitor therapy. Nature. 2012;489(7414):155–159.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerds A, Su D, Martynova A, et al. Ruxolitinib rechallenge can improve constitutional symptoms and splenomegaly in patients with myelofibrosis: a case series. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2018;18(11):e463–e468.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Palandri F, Tiribelli M, Breccia M, et al. Ruxolitinib rechallenge in resistant or intolerant patients with myelofibrosis: frequency, therapeutic effects, and impact on outcome. Cancer. 2021;127(15):2657–2665.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Mesa RA, Jamieson C, et al. Case series of potential Wernicke’s encephalopathy in patients treated with fedratinib. Blood. 2017;130:4197.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison CN, Kiladjian JJ, Verstovsek S, et al. Overall and progression-free survival in patients treated with fedratinib as first-line myelofibrosis (MF) therapy and after prior ruxolitinib (rux): results from the jakarta and jakarta2 trials. Hemasphere. 2021;5:S203.
   Google Scholar
• Tefferi A, Lasho TL, Begna KH, et al. A pilot study of the telomerase inhibitor imetelstat for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(10):908–919.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mascarenhas J, Komrokji RS, Palandri F, et al. Randomized, single-blind, multicenter phase II study of two doses of imetelstat in relapsed or refractory myelofibrosis. J Clin Oncol. 2021;39(26):2881–2892.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rumi E, Pietra D, Pascutto C, et al. Clinical effect of driver mutations of JAK2, CALR, or MPL in primary myelofibrosis. Blood. 2014;124(7):1062–1069.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tefferi A, Lasho TL, Finke CM, et al. CALR vs JAK2 vs MPL-mutated or triple-negative myelofibrosis: clinical, cytogenetic and molecular comparisons. Leukemia. 2014;28(7):1472–1477.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kiladjian J, Mascarenhas JO, Komrokji RS, et al. Imetelstat treatment results in clinical benefits, including improved overall survival, in patients with higher-risk triple-negative myelofibrosis relapsed/refractory to janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi). Blood. 2020;136:3084.
   Google Scholar
• Abou Dalle I, Kantarjian H, Daver N, et al. Phase II study of single-agent nivolumab in patients with myelofibrosis. Ann Hematol. 2021;2021:5.
   Google Scholar
• Hobbs GS, Bozkus CC, Wadleigh M, et al. Results of a phase II study of PD-1 inhibition in advanced myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):14–15.
   Google Scholar
• Pemmaraju N, Carter BZ, Bose P, et al. Final results of a phase 2 clinical trial of LCL161, an oral SMAC mimetic for patients with myelofibrosis. Blood Adv. 2021;5(16):3163–3173.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gangat N, Marinaccio C, Swords R, et al. Aurora kinase a inhibition provides clinical benefit, normalizes megakaryocytes, and reduces bone marrow fibrosis in patients with myelofibrosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(16):4898–4906.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pemmaraju N, Gupta V, Ali H, et al. A multicenter phase 1/2 clinical trial of tagraxofusp, a CD123-targeted therapy, in patients with poor-risk primary and secondary myelofibrosis. Blood. 2020;136(Supplement 1):39–40.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verstovsek S, Talpaz M, Wadleigh M, et al. A randomized, double blind phase 2 study of 3 different doses of prm-151 in patients with myelofibrosis who were previously treated with or ineligible for ruxolitinib. Hemasphere. 2019;2019:S828.
   Google Scholar
• Al-Ali H, Delgado RG, Lange A, et al. KRT-232, a first-in-class, murine double minute 2 inhibitor, for myelofibrosis relapsed or refractory to janus-associated kinase inhibitor treatment. Hemasphere. 2020;4:S215.
   Google Scholar
• Gill HS, Yacoub A, Pettit K, et al. A phase 2 study of the lsd1 inhibitor img-7289 (bomedemstat) for the treatment of advanced myelofibrosis. Hemasphere. 2021;5:EP1074.
   Google Scholar
• Talpaz M, Rampal RK, Verstovsek S, et al. CPI-0610, a bromodomain and extraterminal domain protein (BET) inhibitor, as monotherapy in advanced myelofibrosis patients refractory/intolerant to JAK inhibitor: update from phase 2 MANIFEST study. Blood. 2020;136:2163.
   Google Scholar
• Yan D, Pomicter AD, Tantravahi S, et al. Nuclear-cytoplasmic transport is a therapeutic target in myelofibrosis. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25(7):2323–2335.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pastore F, Bhagwat N, Pastore A, et al. PRMT5 inhibition modulates E2F1 methylation and gene regulatory networks leading to therapeutic efficacy in JAK2V617F mutant MPN. Cancer Discov. 2020;10(11):1742–1757.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar