Prognostic implications of the European consensus for grading of bone marrow fibrosis in chronic idiopathic myelofibrosis

Vener, Claudia; Fracchiolla, Nicola Stefano; Gianelli, Umberto; Calori, Rossella; Radaelli, Franca; Iurlo, Alessandra; Caberlon, Sabrina; Gerli, Giancarla; Boiocchi, Leonardo; Deliliers, Giorgio Lambertenghi

doi:10.1182/blood-2007-09-112953

Cited by 78 publications

(76 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…According to our own data that include a large cohort of precursor PMF a more favorable relative survival is documented in comparison to the advanced disease stages (Table V). In confirmation of our findings [102,128], in a recently published small series of patients prefibrotic to early fibrotic patients with PMF revealed a better overall survival [108].On the other hand, in multivariate risk analysis the extend of BM fibrosis [121] fails to exert an independent influence on survival [128,135]. According to a large study on 1,054 patients diagnosed with advanced PMF (MMM) at seven centers, median survival was 69 months (5.7 years) with 49% dead at time of analysis [141].…”

Section: Primary Myelofibrosissupporting

confidence: 90%

“…An extreme heterogeneity of survival patterns has been reported in larger series of patients with PMF ranging between 3.5 and 10 years [22,102,128,[130][131][132][133][134][135][136][137][138][139][140][141]. However, only a few of these studies considered the full spectrum of disease manifestation including prodromal stages [108,128,135,138]. According to our own data that include a large cohort of precursor PMF a more favorable relative survival is documented in comparison to the advanced disease stages (Table V).…”

Section: Primary Myelofibrosismentioning

confidence: 85%

“…Clinicians are aware that in large series a striking variability in the hematological findings of patients may be observed at the time of first presentation [90,[102][103][104][105][106][107][108]. Wide ranges of clinical parameters on first sight were paralleled by corresponding BM features that may very initially present a hypercellular BM without or only slight reticulin MF [102,104,106,[109][110][111].…”

Section: Primary Myelofibrosismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Prodromal myeloproliferative neoplasms: The 2008 WHO classification

Kvasnicka

Thiele

2009

American J Hematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The concept of prodromal chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms has been endorsed by the WHO classification implicating a stepwise evolution of disease. Histology of the bone marrow (BM) and borderline to mildly expressed clinical features play a pivotal role for diagnosing prefibrotic-early primary myelofibrosis. By lowering the platelet count for essential thrombocythemia and regarding BM morphology, early manifestations are tackled. Pre-polycythemic stages of polycythemia vera with a low hemoglobin level at onset are diagnosed by positive JAK2V617F mutation status, a low erythropoietin value, and characteristic BM features. The revised WHO classification incorporates hematological, morphological, and moleculargenetic parameters to generate a consensus-based working diagnosis. Am. J. Hematol. 85:62-69, 2010. V

show abstract

Section: Primary Myelofibrosissupporting

confidence: 90%

Section: Primary Myelofibrosismentioning

confidence: 85%

Section: Primary Myelofibrosismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prodromal myeloproliferative neoplasms: The 2008 WHO classification

Kvasnicka

Thiele

2009

American J Hematol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Notwithstanding these limitations, bone marrow histology should always be performed in the diagnostic work-up of myeloproliferative neoplasms, as individual parameters (in particular represented by overall cellularity, amount/shifting of erythropoiesis and granulopoiesis and bone marrow fibrosis) may be helpful in the differential diagnosis of Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms or have prognostic significance. 24,25 Keeping this in mind, and without entering into the logic of supporting or opposing the WHO classification, we believe that these promising results deserve to be further improved, possibly with the organization of larger consensus conferences, to ensure a more precise and early diagnosis for patients affected by these dramatic diseases.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Reproducibility of the WHO histological criteria for the diagnosis of Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms

et al. 2014

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study, performed on behalf of the Italian Registry of Thrombocythaemias (Registro Italiano Trombocitemie), aimed to test the inter-observer reproducibility of the histological parameters proposed by the WHO classification for the diagnosis of the Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms. A series of 103 bone marrow biopsy samples of Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms consecutively collected in 2004 were classified according to the WHO criteria as follows: essential thrombocythaemia (n ¼ 34), primary myelofibrosis (n ¼ 44) and polycythaemia vera (n ¼ 25). Two independent groups of pathologists reviewed the bone marrow biopsies. The first group was asked to reach a collegial 'consensus' diagnosis. The second group reviewed individually all the cases to recognize the main morphological parameters indicated by the WHO classification and report their results in a database. They were subsequently instructed to individually build a 'personal' diagnosis of myeloproliferative neoplasms subtype just assembling the parameters collected in the database. Our results indicate that high levels of agreement (Z70%) have been reached for about all of the morphological features. Moreover, among the 18 evaluated histological features, 11 resulted statistically more useful for the differential diagnosis among the different Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms. Finally, we found a high percentage of agreement (76%) between the 'personal' and 'consensus' diagnosis (Cohen's kappa statistic 40.40). In conclusion, our results support the use of the histological criteria proposed by the WHO

show abstract

“…However, increased reticulin grade is an adverse prognostic factor in primary myelofibrosis, essential thrombocythemia, and polycythemia vera. [18][19][20][21] The level of reticulin fibrosis is included among the criteria used to establish a diagnosis of post-polycythemic myelofibrosis and post-thrombocythemic myelofibrosis, which represent clinically progressed stages of polycythemia vera and essential thrombocythemia, respectively. 22 Moreover, bone marrow fibrosis is a dynamic process and has been shown to resolve over time following eradication of the neoplastic clone by allogeneic stem cell transplantation in primary myelofibrosis.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%