Assessment and prognostic value of the European leukemiaNet criteria for clinicohematologic response, resistance, and intolerance to hydroxyurea in polycythemia vera

195Citations
Citations of this article
137Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Criteria of response and definition of resistance and intolerance to hydroxyurea (HU) in polycythemia vera (PV) were proposed by the European LeukemiaNet (ELN). Such criteria were evaluated in 261 PV patients (median follow-up, 7.2 years) treated with HU for a median of 4.4 years. Complete response, partial response, and no response were observed in 24%, 66%, and 10% of patients, respectively. Achieving ELN response (complete or partial) or hematocrit response did not result in better survival or less thrombosis and bleeding. On the contrary, having no response in leukocyte count was associated with higher risk of death (HR, 2.7; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3%-5.4%; P = .007), whereas lack of response in platelet count involved a higher risk of thrombosis and bleeding. Resistance and intolerance to HU was registered in 11% and 13% of patients, respectively. Resistance to HU was associated with higher risk of death (HR, 5.6; 95% CI, 2.7%- 11.9%; P < .001) and transformation (HR, 6.8; 95% CI, 3.0%-15.4%; P < .001). In summary, fulfilling the ELN definition for response to HU was not associated with a benefit in the clinical outcome in PV, whereas response in platelet and white blood cell counts were predictive of less thrombohemorrhagic complications and better prognosis, respectively. Resistance to HU was an adverse prognostic factor. © 2012 by The American Society of Hematology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Alvarez-Larrán, A., Pereira, A., Cervantes, F., Arellano-Rodrigo, E., Hernández-Boluda, J. C., Ferrer-Marín, F., … Besses, C. (2012). Assessment and prognostic value of the European leukemiaNet criteria for clinicohematologic response, resistance, and intolerance to hydroxyurea in polycythemia vera. Blood, 119(6), 1363–1369. https://doi.org/10.1182/blood-2011-10-387787

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free