Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2018 Oct;93(10):1245-1253.
doi: 10.1002/ajh.25234. Epub 2018 Sep 26.

Prognosis of patients with intermediate risk IPSS-R myelodysplastic syndrome indicates variable outcomes and need for models beyond IPSS-R

Affiliations
Comparative Study

Prognosis of patients with intermediate risk IPSS-R myelodysplastic syndrome indicates variable outcomes and need for models beyond IPSS-R

Christopher B Benton et al. Am J Hematol. 2018 Oct.

Abstract

The International Prognostic Scoring System-Revised (IPSS-R) is one standard for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) risk stratification. It divides patients into five categories including an intermediate subset (IPSS-R int-risk). Outcomes and clinical interventions for patients with IPSS-R int-risk are not well defined. We performed an analysis of outcomes of this group of patients. Out of 3167 patients, a total of 298 were identified with IPSS-R int-risk MDS and retrospectively analyzed to assess characteristics affecting outcomes. Cox proportional hazard models for overall survival (OS) were performed to identify statistically significant clinical factors that influence survival. Age of 66 years or greater, peripheral blood blasts of 2% or more, and history of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion were significantly associated with inferior survival. Based on these features, MDS patients with IPSS-R int-risk were classified into two prognostic risk groups for analysis, an int-favorable group and an int-adverse group, and had significantly divergent outcomes. Sequential prognostication was validated using two independent datasets comprising over 700 IPSS-R int-risk patients. The difference in median survival between int-favorable and int-adverse patients was 3.7 years in the test cohort, and 1.8 and 2.0 years in the two validation cohorts. These results confirm significantly variable outcomes of patients with IPSS-R int-risk and need for different prognostic systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest Disclosures

The authors have no conflicts to report.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. Heterogeneity and divergent outcomes among IPSS-R intermediate-risk patients.
A: Variability and distribution of IPSS-R int-risk MDS patients. Top panel shows distribution of survival times vs. age. Bottom panel shows histogram of overall survival (bin width=6 months). Black curve shows non-linear fit of histogram of non-censored survival times using two Gaussian curves. B: Distribution of patients by sequentially stratification, based on the sum of three classification parameters: age (0 or 2 points), PB blasts (0 or 1 point), and RBC transfusion history (0 or 1 point). Each numerical score is subdivided to indicate how patients achieved specified scores. C: Overall survival among patients with IPSS-R intermediate-risk MDS according to two prognostic groups sequentially stratified as described, according to age, PB blasts, and transfusion history. D: Transfused units of red blood cells and platelets per patient year among int-favorable and int-adverse patients who required transfusions after diagnosis of MDS (p=<0.0001 for both red blood cells and platelets).
Figure 2.
Figure 2.. IPSS classification of test cohort and survival of external validation cohorts.
A: Distribution of intermediate-favorable (int-fav) and intermediate-adverse (int-adv) test cohort groups when classified by IPSS. Survival for the two sequentially stratified prognostic groups using proposed risk score described. B: Survival based on sequential score for test cohort patients classified as IPSS intermediate-1 (int-1) risk. C: Survival based on sequential score for test cohort patients classified as IPSS intermediate-2 (int-2) risk. D: Survival of external validation cohort 1, IPSS-R int-risk patients from outside institution (n=111), classified by sequential scoring as int-favorable vs. int-adverse. E: Survival of external validation cohort 2, IPSS-R int-risk patients from outside institution (n=616), classified by sequential scoring as int-favorable vs. int-adverse.

References

    1. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian R, et al. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood. 2016;127(20):2391–2405. - PubMed
    1. Kouides PA, Bennett JM. Understanding the Myelodysplastic Syndromes. Oncologist. 1997;2(6):389–401. - PubMed
    1. Greenberg PL, Tuechler H, Schanz J, et al. Revised international prognostic scoring system for myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 2012;120(12):2454–2465. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Greenberg PL, Stone RM, Al-Kali A, et al. Myelodysplastic syndromes, version 2.2017, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2017;15(1):60–87. - PubMed
    1. Greenberg P, Cox C, LeBeau MM, et al. International scoring system for evaluating prognosis in myelodysplastic syndromes. Blood. 1997;89(6):2079–2088. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms