2023
Efficacy of Imetelstat in Achieving Red Blood Cell Transfusion Independence (RBC-TI) across Different Risk Subgroups in Patients with Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (LR-MDS) Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) to Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs) in IMerge Phase 3 Study
Komrokji R, Santini V, Fenaux P, Savona M, Madanat Y, Berry T, Sherman L, Navada S, Feller F, Sun L, Xia Q, Wan Y, Huang F, Zeidan A, Platzbecker U. Efficacy of Imetelstat in Achieving Red Blood Cell Transfusion Independence (RBC-TI) across Different Risk Subgroups in Patients with Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (LR-MDS) Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) to Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agents (ESAs) in IMerge Phase 3 Study. Blood 2023, 142: 194. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2023-181237.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchInternational Prognostic Scoring SystemLower-risk myelodysplastic syndromesDifferent risk subgroupsErythropoiesis stimulating agentsLow-risk subgroupsRisk groupsRisk subgroupsResponse rateTI ratesRBC-TIClinical efficacyRisk categoriesHigh riskLower riskRed blood cell transfusion independenceIPSS risk groupPhase 3 portionIntermediate-risk groupCytogenetic risk groupHigh-risk patientsPhase 3 studyPrognostic scoring systemIntermediate-risk subgroupsHigh-risk subgroupsHigh-risk groupWhen to use which molecular prognostic scoring system in the management of patients with MDS?
Kewan T, Bewersdorf J, Gurnari C, Xie Z, Stahl M, Zeidan A. When to use which molecular prognostic scoring system in the management of patients with MDS? Best Practice & Research Clinical Haematology 2023, 36: 101517. PMID: 38092484, DOI: 10.1016/j.beha.2023.101517.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsConceptsInternational Prognostic Scoring SystemPrognostic scoring systemAcute myeloid leukemiaScoring systemRisk stratificationRecurrent molecular alterationsHigh-risk patientsAppropriate risk stratificationManagement of patientsRecurrent genetic mutationsIntensive therapyMyeloid leukemiaTreatment strategiesPrognostic toolDisease pathogenesisMolecular alterationsHematopoietic cancersClinical decisionHeterogeneous groupGenetic mutationsNext-generation sequencingPrognostic systemPatientsVariable propensitySubsequent revisionUpdates on risk stratification and management of lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms
Badar T, Madanat Y, Zeidan A. Updates on risk stratification and management of lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms. Future Oncology 2023, 19: 1877-1889. PMID: 37750305, DOI: 10.2217/fon-2023-0454.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsErythropoiesis-stimulating agentsTreatment-naive patientsHigh-risk patientsMeaningful efficacyIndolent courseDismal prognosisRandomized trialsRisk stratificationNeoplasm patientsSerial monitoringClinical trialsNovel therapiesPatientsAppropriate managementModest responseGood responseNeoplasmsTrialsNovel compoundsLuspaterceptLenalidomidePrognosisAnemiaTherapyMore needsSpectrum From Clonal Hematopoiesis to Myelodysplastic Neoplasm/Syndromes and Other Myeloid Neoplasms
Xie Z, Chen E, Mendez L, Komrokji R, Zeidan A. Spectrum From Clonal Hematopoiesis to Myelodysplastic Neoplasm/Syndromes and Other Myeloid Neoplasms. The Cancer Journal 2023, 29: 130-137. PMID: 37195768, DOI: 10.1097/ppo.0000000000000656.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsConceptsClonal hematopoiesisHigh-risk patientsRisk of progressionSuch patientsUndetermined significanceAge-related diseasesHematologic malignanciesClonal cytopeniaMyeloid neoplasmsHigh riskUnmet needMyeloid malignanciesNatural historyCH managementPatientsMalignancySignificant knowledge gapsRiskHematopoiesisCytopeniasNeoplasmsSyndromeConsiderations for Drug Development in Myelodysplastic Syndromes
Sekeres M, Kim N, DeZern A, Norsworthy K, Garcia J, de Claro R, Theoret M, Jen E, Ehrlich L, Zeidan A, Komrokji R. Considerations for Drug Development in Myelodysplastic Syndromes. Clinical Cancer Research 2023, 29: 2573-2579. PMID: 36688922, PMCID: PMC10349686, DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-22-3348.Peer-Reviewed Reviews, Practice Guidelines, Standards, and Consensus StatementsConceptsMyelodysplastic syndromeTrial designDrug developmentResponse criteriaLow-risk diseaseHigh-risk patientsFuture trial designClinical trial designQuality of lifeValidation of PatientHigh-need populationDurable responsesOverall survivalAnemic patientsTransfusion dependencyClinical benefitPatient populationAdvanced ageClinical trialsDose reductionOutcome instrumentsNew therapiesPreclinical modelingPatientsActive drug
2018
Wide Variation in Use and Interpretation of Gene Mutation Profiling Panels Among Health Care Providers of Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS): Results of a Large Web-Based Survey
Pine A, Chokr N, Stahl M, Steensma D, Sekeres M, Litzow M, Luger S, Stone R, Greenberg P, Bejar R, Gore S, Zeidan A. Wide Variation in Use and Interpretation of Gene Mutation Profiling Panels Among Health Care Providers of Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS): Results of a Large Web-Based Survey. Blood 2018, 132: 1825. DOI: 10.1182/blood-2018-99-113888.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchGene mutation profilingSouthwest Oncology GroupMyelodysplastic syndromeRisk stratificationHealth care providersMutation profilingOncology GroupMDS patientsClinical trialsCare providersWeb-based surveyConsensus evidence-based guidelinesInternational Prognostic Scoring SystemEastern Cooperative Oncology GroupGene panelAdvisory CommitteeConventional prognostic modelsThird of respondersHigh-risk patientsCooperative Oncology GroupPrognostic scoring systemRisk stratification toolManagement of patientsStem cell transplantEvidence-based guidelines
2013
Azacitidine With Or Without Entinostat For The Treatment Of Therapy-Related Myeloid Neoplasm: Further Results Of The E1905 North American Leukemia Intergroup Study
Prebet T, Sun Z, Ketterling R, Greenberg P, Zeidan A, Litzow M, Gabrilove J, Erba H, Paietta E, Czader M, Gore S, Tallman M. Azacitidine With Or Without Entinostat For The Treatment Of Therapy-Related Myeloid Neoplasm: Further Results Of The E1905 North American Leukemia Intergroup Study. Blood 2013, 122: 2777. DOI: 10.1182/blood.v122.21.2777.2777.Peer-Reviewed Original ResearchTherapy-related myeloid neoplasmsAcute myeloid leukemiaAZA monotherapyMyeloid neoplasmsResponse rateRisk cytogeneticsCombination armMyeloid leukemiaDe novo MDS/AMLRandomized phase 2 studyECOG PS 0Higher risk MDSLeukemia intergroup studyMost prospective trialsNovo MDS patientsT-MN patientsUnfavorable-risk cytogeneticsUse of azacitidineIntermediate-risk cytogeneticsMedian overall survivalHigh-risk patientsPhase 2 studyPoor prognosis subgroupStem cell transplantPeripheral blood counts