EHA Library - The official digital education library of European Hematology Association (EHA)

INFECTIOUS EVENTS IN A COHORT OF PATIENTS WITH MYELOFIBROSIS UNDER TREATMENT COMPARING RUXOLITINIB WITH CONVENTIONAL THERAPY. A MONOCENTRIC EXPERIENCE OF 22 PATIENTS RETROSPECTIVELY ANALYSED.
Author(s): ,
Lorenza Torti
Affiliations:
Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Unit, Pescara,Italy
,
AnnaMaria Morelli
Affiliations:
Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Unit,Pescara,Italy
,
Francesco Bacci
Affiliations:
Section of Hematopathology, Department of Hematology and Oncological Sciences, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital,Bologna,Italy
Paolo Di Bartolomeo
Affiliations:
Department of Hematology and Bone Marrow Unit,Pescara,Italy
(Abstract release date: 05/18/17) EHA Library. Torti L. 05/18/17; 182773; PB2059
Dr. Lorenza Torti
Dr. Lorenza Torti
Contributions
Abstract

Abstract: PB2059

Type: Publication Only

Background
Treatment with the Janus-activated kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor ruxolitinib decreases constitutional symptoms and spleen size in myelofibrosis.

However accumulating evidences suggest that the drug also exerts substantial immunosuppressive activity.
The impressive clinical activity of ruxolitinib is predominatly mediated by its profound anti-inflammatory effects modulating dendritic cell (DC) function resulting in impaired CD4+ and CD8+ activity.
Several studies have shown that Ruxolitinib affects different cytokines (IL1, IL6 and TNFalfa) and other immune processes and has been linked to increased incidence of opportunistic and no opportunistic infections. Herein we report our experience at our Centre.

Aims
In our retrospective study we analysed myelofibrosis patients treated with Ruxolitinib and cytoreductive treatment with Hydroxiurea and supportive therapy followed in our Department from 2012 to 2016 to evaluate rate of infections developed.

Methods
We reviewed 22 patients presenting myelofibrosis (median age 72, range 60-86)describing clinical and biological features (Table 1). Our aim was description of documented infections identified with conventional treatment and with Ruxolitinib. They were 11 treated with JAK inhibitors and 11 with Hydroxiurea taken orally, similar for age and clinical features.

Results
A total of 22 patients consecutively diagnosed were included in this analysis. There were 15 primary and 7 secondary myelofibrosis patients. According to the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) 8 were low risk, 10 were intermediate risk and 4 were high.

A total of 5 documented infections were identified throughtout the evaluation period, 4 were grade 1 and one grade 2. They are various including oral herpes simplex reactivation, pneumonia, recurrent viral flu syndromes, esophagitis fungal and urinary infections.
All of them were present in the subgroup of patients undergoing therapy with Ruxolitinib (45%) after a medium time of 8 months from beginning of therapy (range 3-10). No patients received any anti-infective prophylaxis.
Median total daily dose of ruxolitinib was 10 mg (range 5-20). All of this infectious complications resolved after antimicrobial therapy and did not require hospitalization. None of patients were treated with concomitant immunosuppressive therapy. 3 of this patients presented renal impairment (median cratinine clearance of 46 ml/min).

Conclusion
These data in our small series of patients suggest a higher incidence of ruxolitinib associated infections observed in clinical practice compared to traditional treatment. Immunosuppressive effect of Ruxolitinib is reported and the use of this drug in the transplant setting with beneficial effects on alloreactivity and on graft versus host disease is becoming more common.

These patients might benefit from receiving prophylactic therapy with antiviral drugs or antibiotics or antifungal therapy or in alternative by careful monitoring.
Finally nowadays physicians and patients should be aware of potential risks of using ruxolitinib including the risk of infections.
In summary, infections can occur in patients treated with ruxolitinib but are generally mild. Generally infections were non-life threatening and managed with appropriate supportive care.
Special care probably should be taken for patients older (more than 75 years old), treated with corticosteroid therapy and with renal impairment.
However larger studies are needed to confirm these observations.

Session topic: 16. Myeloproliferative neoplasms - Clinical

Keyword(s): Myelofibrosis, Janus Kinase inhibitor, Immune deficiency

Abstract: PB2059

Type: Publication Only

Background
Treatment with the Janus-activated kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor ruxolitinib decreases constitutional symptoms and spleen size in myelofibrosis.

However accumulating evidences suggest that the drug also exerts substantial immunosuppressive activity.
The impressive clinical activity of ruxolitinib is predominatly mediated by its profound anti-inflammatory effects modulating dendritic cell (DC) function resulting in impaired CD4+ and CD8+ activity.
Several studies have shown that Ruxolitinib affects different cytokines (IL1, IL6 and TNFalfa) and other immune processes and has been linked to increased incidence of opportunistic and no opportunistic infections. Herein we report our experience at our Centre.

Aims
In our retrospective study we analysed myelofibrosis patients treated with Ruxolitinib and cytoreductive treatment with Hydroxiurea and supportive therapy followed in our Department from 2012 to 2016 to evaluate rate of infections developed.

Methods
We reviewed 22 patients presenting myelofibrosis (median age 72, range 60-86)describing clinical and biological features (Table 1). Our aim was description of documented infections identified with conventional treatment and with Ruxolitinib. They were 11 treated with JAK inhibitors and 11 with Hydroxiurea taken orally, similar for age and clinical features.

Results
A total of 22 patients consecutively diagnosed were included in this analysis. There were 15 primary and 7 secondary myelofibrosis patients. According to the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) 8 were low risk, 10 were intermediate risk and 4 were high.

A total of 5 documented infections were identified throughtout the evaluation period, 4 were grade 1 and one grade 2. They are various including oral herpes simplex reactivation, pneumonia, recurrent viral flu syndromes, esophagitis fungal and urinary infections.
All of them were present in the subgroup of patients undergoing therapy with Ruxolitinib (45%) after a medium time of 8 months from beginning of therapy (range 3-10). No patients received any anti-infective prophylaxis.
Median total daily dose of ruxolitinib was 10 mg (range 5-20). All of this infectious complications resolved after antimicrobial therapy and did not require hospitalization. None of patients were treated with concomitant immunosuppressive therapy. 3 of this patients presented renal impairment (median cratinine clearance of 46 ml/min).

Conclusion
These data in our small series of patients suggest a higher incidence of ruxolitinib associated infections observed in clinical practice compared to traditional treatment. Immunosuppressive effect of Ruxolitinib is reported and the use of this drug in the transplant setting with beneficial effects on alloreactivity and on graft versus host disease is becoming more common.

These patients might benefit from receiving prophylactic therapy with antiviral drugs or antibiotics or antifungal therapy or in alternative by careful monitoring.
Finally nowadays physicians and patients should be aware of potential risks of using ruxolitinib including the risk of infections.
In summary, infections can occur in patients treated with ruxolitinib but are generally mild. Generally infections were non-life threatening and managed with appropriate supportive care.
Special care probably should be taken for patients older (more than 75 years old), treated with corticosteroid therapy and with renal impairment.
However larger studies are needed to confirm these observations.

Session topic: 16. Myeloproliferative neoplasms - Clinical

Keyword(s): Myelofibrosis, Janus Kinase inhibitor, Immune deficiency

By clicking “Accept Terms & all Cookies” or by continuing to browse, you agree to the storing of third-party cookies on your device to enhance your user experience and agree to the user terms and conditions of this learning management system (LMS).

Cookie Settings
Accept Terms & all Cookies