Purpose The initial results of the APL0406 trial showed that the combination of all- trans-retinoic acid (ATRA) and arsenic trioxide (ATO) is at least not inferior to standard ATRA and chemotherapy (CHT) in first-line therapy of low- or intermediate-risk acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL). We herein report the final analysis on the complete series of patients enrolled onto this trial. Patients and Methods The APL0406 study was a prospective, randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III noninferiority trial. Eligible patients were adults between 18 and 71 years of age with newly diagnosed, low- or intermediate-risk APL (WBC at diagnosis ≤ 10 × 10/L). Overall, 276 patients were randomly assigned to receive ATRA-ATO or ATRA-CHT between October 2007 and January 2013. Results Of 263 patients evaluable for response to induction, 127 (100%) of 127 patients and 132 (97%) of 136 patients achieved complete remission (CR) in the ATRA-ATO and ATRA-CHT arms, respectively ( P = .12). After a median follow-up of 40.6 months, the event-free survival, cumulative incidence of relapse, and overall survival at 50 months for patients in the ATRA-ATO versus ATRA-CHT arms were 97.3% v 80%, 1.9% v 13.9%, and 99.2% v 92.6%, respectively ( P < .001, P = .0013, and P = .0073, respectively). Postinduction events included two relapses and one death in CR in the ATRA-ATO arm and two instances of molecular resistance after third consolidation, 15 relapses, and five deaths in CR in the ATRA-CHT arm. Two patients in the ATRA-CHT arm developed a therapy-related myeloid neoplasm. Conclusion These results show that the advantages of ATRA-ATO over ATRA-CHT increase over time and that there is significantly greater and more sustained antileukemic efficacy of ATO-ATRA compared with ATRA-CHT in low- and intermediate-risk APL.

Polycythemia vera (PV) and essential thrombocythemia (ET) are myeloproliferative neoplasms with variable risk of evolution into post-PV and post-ET myelofibrosis, from now on referred to as secondary myelofibrosis (SMF). No specific tools have been defined for risk stratification in SMF. To develop a prognostic model for predicting survival, we studied 685 JAK2, CALR, and MPL annotated patients with SMF. Median survival of the whole cohort was 9.3 years (95% CI: 8-not reached-NR-). Through penalized Cox regressions we identified negative predictors of survival and according to beta risk coefficients we assigned 2 points to hemoglobin level <11 g/dl, to circulating blasts ⩾3%, and to CALR-unmutated genotype, 1 point to platelet count <150 × 10/l and to constitutional symptoms, and 0.15 points to any year of age. Myelofibrosis Secondary to PV and ET-Prognostic Model (MYSEC-PM) allocated SMF patients into four risk categories with different survival (P<0.0001): low (median survival NR; 133 patients), intermediate-1 (9.3 years, 95% CI: 8.1-NR; 245 patients), intermediate-2 (4.4 years, 95% CI: 3.2-7.9; 126 patients), and high risk (2 years, 95% CI: 1.7-3.9; 75 patients). Finally, we found that the MYSEC-PM represents the most appropriate tool for SMF decision-making to be used in clinical and trial settings.