Daniel F Pease1, Julie A Ross2, Jenny N Poynter3, Phuong L Nguyen4, Betsy Hirsch5, Adina Cioc6, Michelle A Roesler7, Erica D Warlick8. 1. Department of Medicine, Hennepin County Medical Center, 701 Park Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55415, United States. Electronic address: daniel.pease@hcmed.org. 2. Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, 2450 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454, United States; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, MMC 806, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. Electronic address: rossx014@umn.edu. 3. Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, 2450 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454, United States; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, MMC 806, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. Electronic address: poynt006@umn.edu. 4. Division of Hematopathology, Hilton 8-60E, Mayo Clinic, 200 First Street SW, Rochester, MN 55905, United States. Electronic address: Nguyen.Phuong@mayo.edu. 5. Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, MMC 609, 420 Delaware Street SE, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, MMC 806, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. Electronic address: hirsc003@umn.edu. 6. Hematopathology, VA Medical Center, 1 Veterans Drive, Minneapolis, MN 55417, United States. Electronic address: ciocm001@umn.edu. 7. Department of Pediatrics, University of Minnesota, 2450 Riverside Avenue, Minneapolis, MN 55454, United States; Masonic Cancer Center, University of Minnesota, MMC 806, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. Electronic address: roesl003@umn.edu. 8. Hematology, Oncology and Transplantation, University of Minnesota, MMC 480, 420 Delaware Street SE, Minneapolis, MN 55455, United States. Electronic address: ewarlick@umn.edu.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The heterogeneous nature of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) complicates therapeutic decision making, particularly for newly diagnosed disease. Factors impacting the treatment plan in this early period of disease course are poorly defined. This study determines whether therapeutic choices for newly diagnosed MDS are associated with location of treatment (community or academic), prognostic risk category, and patient age. METHODS: The adults in Minnesota with myelodysplastic syndromes (AIMMS) database was utilized in this statewide, prospective population-based study conducted by the University of Minnesota (UMN), Mayo Clinic, and Minnesota Department of Health. Adult (age 20+ years) cases of MDS newly diagnosed starting in April 2010 were invited to participate. This analysis includes patients enrolled during the first study year with 1-year follow-up data. Treatment choices (supportive, active, and transplant) were stratified by the international prognostic scoring system (IPSS) and the revised-IPSS (IPSS-R), then separated into groups by location of care and age (<65 or 65+ years). Academic-based care was any contact with the UMN and Mayo Clinic; community-based care was all other clinical sites. RESULTS: Stratification by IPSS and IPSS-R showed supportive care decreased and active care increased with advancing risk categories (p<0.0001). Comparing treatment setting, community-based care had 77% supportive and 23% active treatment; academic-based care was 36% supportive, 41% active, and 23% transplant (p<0.0001). By age groups, patients <65 years with intermediate, high, or very high risk disease by IPSS-R received 97% active care/transplant, compared to only 52% of patients age 65+. CONCLUSIONS: Younger patients and those treated at academic centers had a more aggressive treatment approach. Whether these treatment differences convey improved disease control and mortality, and therefore should be extended more frequently to older and community-based patients, is the subject of ongoing prospective study.
PURPOSE: The heterogeneous nature of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) complicates therapeutic decision making, particularly for newly diagnosed disease. Factors impacting the treatment plan in this early period of disease course are poorly defined. This study determines whether therapeutic choices for newly diagnosed MDS are associated with location of treatment (community or academic), prognostic risk category, and patient age. METHODS: The adults in Minnesota with myelodysplastic syndromes (AIMMS) database was utilized in this statewide, prospective population-based study conducted by the University of Minnesota (UMN), Mayo Clinic, and Minnesota Department of Health. Adult (age 20+ years) cases of MDS newly diagnosed starting in April 2010 were invited to participate. This analysis includes patients enrolled during the first study year with 1-year follow-up data. Treatment choices (supportive, active, and transplant) were stratified by the international prognostic scoring system (IPSS) and the revised-IPSS (IPSS-R), then separated into groups by location of care and age (<65 or 65+ years). Academic-based care was any contact with the UMN and Mayo Clinic; community-based care was all other clinical sites. RESULTS: Stratification by IPSS and IPSS-R showed supportive care decreased and active care increased with advancing risk categories (p<0.0001). Comparing treatment setting, community-based care had 77% supportive and 23% active treatment; academic-based care was 36% supportive, 41% active, and 23% transplant (p<0.0001). By age groups, patients <65 years with intermediate, high, or very high risk disease by IPSS-R received 97% active care/transplant, compared to only 52% of patients age 65+. CONCLUSIONS: Younger patients and those treated at academic centers had a more aggressive treatment approach. Whether these treatment differences convey improved disease control and mortality, and therefore should be extended more frequently to older and community-based patients, is the subject of ongoing prospective study.
Authors: David Bowen; Dominic Culligan; Simon Jowitt; Stephen Kelsey; Ghulam Mufti; David Oscier; Jane Parker Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: F Zorat; V Shetty; D Dutt; L Lisak; F Nascimben; K Allampallam; S Dar; A York; S Gezer; P Venugopal; A Raza Journal: Br J Haematol Date: 2001-12 Impact factor: 6.998
Authors: P Greenberg; C Cox; M M LeBeau; P Fenaux; P Morel; G Sanz; M Sanz; T Vallespi; T Hamblin; D Oscier; K Ohyashiki; K Toyama; C Aul; G Mufti; J Bennett Journal: Blood Date: 1997-03-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: A Raza; P Meyer; D Dutt; F Zorat; L Lisak; F Nascimben; M du Randt; C Kaspar; C Goldberg; J Loew; S Dar; S Gezer; P Venugopal; J Zeldis Journal: Blood Date: 2001-08-15 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Lewis R Silverman; Erin P Demakos; Bercedis L Peterson; Alice B Kornblith; Jimmie C Holland; Rosalie Odchimar-Reissig; Richard M Stone; Douglas Nelson; Bayard L Powell; Carlos M DeCastro; John Ellerton; Richard A Larson; Charles A Schiffer; James F Holland Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2002-05-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Alan List; Sandy Kurtin; Denise J Roe; Andrew Buresh; Daruka Mahadevan; Deborah Fuchs; Lisa Rimsza; Ruth Heaton; Robert Knight; Jerome B Zeldis Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-02-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Emilio Paolo Alessandrino; Sergio Amadori; Giovanni Barosi; Mario Cazzola; Alberto Grossi; Lucio N Liberato; Franco Locatelli; Monia Marchetti; Enrica Morra; Paolo Rebulla; Giuseppe Visani; Sante Tura Journal: Haematologica Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Corey S Cutler; Stephanie J Lee; Peter Greenberg; H Joachim Deeg; Waleska S Pérez; Claudio Anasetti; Brian J Bolwell; Mitchell S Cairo; Robert Peter Gale; John P Klein; Hillard M Lazarus; Jane L Liesveld; Philip L McCarthy; Gustavo A Milone; J Douglas Rizzo; Kirk R Schultz; Michael E Trigg; Armand Keating; Daniel J Weisdorf; Joseph H Antin; Mary M Horowitz Journal: Blood Date: 2004-03-23 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Angela R Smith; Erica D Warlick; Michelle A Roesler; Jenny N Poynter; Michaela Richardson; Phuong Nguyen; Adina Cioc; Betsy Hirsch; Julie A Ross Journal: Ann Hematol Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 3.673
Authors: Erica D Warlick; Celalettin Ustun; Astrid Andreescu; Anthony F Bonagura; Andrew Brunner; Abhinav B Chandra; James M Foran; Mark B Juckett; Tamila L Kindwall-Keller; Virginia M Klimek; Daniel F Pease; David P Steensma; Bryce M Waldman; Mary M Horowitz; Linda J Burns; Nandita Khera Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-08-10 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael Pfeilstöcker; Heinz Tuechler; Guillermo Sanz; Julie Schanz; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Francesc Solé; John M Bennett; David Bowen; Pierre Fenaux; Francois Dreyfus; Hagop Kantarjian; Andrea Kuendgen; Luca Malcovati; Mario Cazzola; Jaroslav Cermak; Christa Fonatsch; Michelle M Le Beau; Marilyn L Slovak; Alessandro Levis; Michael Luebbert; Jaroslaw Maciejewski; Sigrid Machherndl-Spandl; Silvia M M Magalhaes; Yasushi Miyazaki; Mikkael A Sekeres; Wolfgang R Sperr; Reinhard Stauder; Sudhir Tauro; Peter Valent; Teresa Vallespi; Arjan A van de Loosdrecht; Ulrich Germing; Detlef Haase; Peter L Greenberg Journal: Blood Date: 2016-06-22 Impact factor: 22.113