In patients with cytopenic myelofibrosis, treatment with the JAK2/IRAK1 inhibitor pacritinib was associated with anemia benefit in the phase 3 PERSIST-2 study. The impact of pacritinib on transfusion independence (TI) has not been previously described, nor has the mechanism by which pacritinib improves anemia been elucidated. Because it has been previously postulated that inhibition of activin A receptor, type 1 (ACVR1)/activin receptor-like kinase-2 improves anemia in patients with myelofibrosis via suppression of hepcidin production, we assessed the relative inhibitory potency of pacritinib compared with other JAK2 inhibitors against ACVR1. Pacritinib inhibited ACVR1 with greater potency (half-maximal inhibitory concentration [IC50] = 16.7 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 12.7) than momelotinib (IC50 = 52.5 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 3.2), fedratinib (IC50 = 273 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 1.0), or ruxolitinib (IC50 > 1000; Cmax:IC50 < 0.01). Pacritinib’s inhibitory activity against ACVR1 was corroborated via inhibition of downstream SMAD signaling in conjunction with marked suppression of hepcidin production. Among patients on PERSIST-2 who were not transfusion independent at baseline based on Gale criteria, a significantly greater proportion achieved TI on pacritinib compared with those treated on best available therapy (37% vs 7%, P = .001), and significantly more had a ≥50% reduction in transfusion burden (49% vs 9%, P < .0001). These data indicate that the anemia benefit of the JAK2/IRAK1 inhibitor pacritinib may be a function of potent ACVR1 inhibition.

Several papers authored by international experts have proposed recommendations on the management of BCR-ABL1+ chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). Following these recommendations, survival of CML patients has become very close to normal. The next, ambitious, step is to bring as many patients as possible into a condition of treatment-free remission (TFR). The Gruppo Italiano Malattie EMatologiche dell’Adulto (GIMEMA; Italian Group for Hematologic Diseases of the Adult) CML Working Party (WP) has developed a project aimed at selecting the treatment policies that may increase the probability of TFR, taking into account 4 variables: the need for TFR, the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the characteristics of leukemia, and the patient. A Delphi-like method was used to reach a consensus among the representatives of 50 centers of the CML WP. A consensus was reached on the assessment of disease risk (EUTOS Long Term Survival [ELTS] score), on the definition of the most appropriate age boundaries for the choice of first-line treatment, on the choice of the TKI for first-line treatment, and on the definition of the responses that do not require a change of the TKI (BCR-ABL1 ≤10% at 3 months, ≤1% at 6 months, ≤0.1% at 12 months, ≤0.01% at 24 months), and of the responses that require a change of the TKI, when the goal is TFR (BCR-ABL1 >10% at 3 and 6 months, >1% at 12 months, and >0.1% at 24 months). These suggestions may help optimize the treatment strategy for TFR.

Cytotoxic agents like Hydroxyurea, Busulfan and Interferon‐alpha are to date the most commonly used therapeutic approaches in Essential Thrombocythemia (ET). However, few data on the efficacy and safety of these agents in the long‐term are currently available. We report a retrospective analysis of the long‐term outcome of 386 consecutive ET patients, followed at single Institution for a median follow‐up of 9.5 years (range, 3–28.5). Cytoreductive therapy was administered to 338 patients (88%), obtaining a response in 86% of cases. Forty‐five patients (12%) experienced a thrombosis. Among baseline characteristics, only history of vascular events prior to ET diagnosis predicted a higher incidence of thrombosis. Evolution in acute leukemia/myelofibrosis occurred in 6 (1,5%) and 20 (5%) patients, and was significantly higher in patients receiving sequential cytotoxic agents. Overall survival was 38% at 19 years and was poorer for patients older than 60 years, with higher leukocytes count (>15 × 10⁹/L), hypertension and mellitus diabetes at ET diagnosis and for patients experiencing a thrombotic event during follow‐up. Cytoreductive therapy was effective in decreasing platelet number with negligible toxicity; however, thrombocytosis control did not reduce the incidence of thrombosis and, for patients who received sequential therapies, the probability of disease evolution was higher and survival was poorer. Am. J. Hematol. 2009.

Antiphospholipid syndrome (APS) is frequently associated with thrombocytopenia, in most cases mild and in the absence of major bleedings. In some patients with a confirmed APS diagnosis, secondary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) may lead to severe thrombocytopenia with consequent major bleeding. At the same time, the presence of antiphospholipid antibodies (aPL) in patients with a diagnosis of primary ITP has been reported in several studies, although with some specific characteristics especially related to the variety of antigenic targets. Even though it does not enter the APS defining criteria, thrombocytopenia should be regarded as a warning sign of a “high risk” APS and thus thoroughly evaluated. The presence of aPL in patients with ITP should be assessed as well to stratify the risk of paradoxical thrombosis. In detail, besides the high hemorrhagic risk in secondary thrombocytopenia, patients with a co-diagnosis of APS or only antibodies are also at risk of arterial and venous thrombosis. In this narrative review, we discuss the correlation between APS and ITP, the mechanisms behind the above-reported entities, in order to support clinicians to define the most appropriate treatment strategy in these patients, especially when anticoagulant or antiplatelet agents may be needed.