Archives

  • 2018-07
  • 2019-04
  • 2019-05
  • 2019-06
  • 2019-07
  • 2019-08
  • 2019-09
  • 2019-10
  • 2019-11
  • 2019-12
  • 2020-01
  • 2020-02
  • 2020-03
  • 2020-04
  • 2020-05
  • 2020-06
  • 2020-07
  • 2020-08
  • 2020-09
  • 2020-10
  • 2020-11
  • 2020-12
  • 2021-01
  • 2021-02
  • 2021-03
  • 2021-04
  • 2021-05
  • 2021-06
  • 2021-07
  • 2021-08
  • 2021-09
  • 2021-10
  • 2021-11
  • 2021-12
  • 2022-01
  • 2022-02
  • 2022-03
  • 2022-04
  • 2022-05
  • 2022-06
  • 2022-07
  • 2022-08
  • 2022-09
  • 2022-10
  • 2022-11
  • 2022-12
  • 2023-01
  • 2023-02
  • 2023-03
  • 2023-04
  • 2023-05
  • 2023-06
  • 2023-07
  • 2023-08
  • 2023-09
  • 2023-10
  • 2023-11
  • 2023-12
  • 2024-01
  • 2024-02
  • 2024-03
  • 2024-04
  • 2024-05
  • On December the patient was started on ruxolitinib mg twice

    2019-04-29

    On December 2013 the patient was started on ruxolitinib 10mg twice a day (day 0). His purchase Tubastatin A HCl dose was increased to 15mg twice a day on day +57 and to 20mg twice a day on day +84. He was tapered off hydroxyurea and was completely off on day +14. As shown in Fig. 1A, the WBC and MCV were reduced gradually over 3 months while his Hgb and purchase Tubastatin A HCl steadily increased, indicating improved marrow function by targeting JAK1/JAK2 signaling and going off hydroxyurea. His peripheral blood showed reduced immature granulocytes while the neutrophils displayed increased cytoplasmic granularity/toxic granulation. His bone marrow had reduced granulocytic hyperplasia (myeloid:erythroid ratio 10:1) and fewer hypolobated megakaryocytes compared with the pre-ruxolitinib bone marrow evaluation. Peripheral and marrow blasts were less than 1%. In addition, his spleen volume was reduced by approximately 75% after approximately 3 months of ruxolitinib therapy as shown in Fig. 1B. Furthermore, his quality of life and total symptom score improved dramatically as shown in Fig. 1C. As a result of his excellent tolerance and response to ruxolitinib, his dose was increased further to the target dose of 20mg twice a day. After this adjustment, his platelets increased further as shown in Fig. 1A. He has gained weight and his performance status improved to ECOG of 1. As of this report, he continues to do well and remains on ruxolitnib 20 mg twice a day. Interestingly, his dramatic clinical response was not associated with a reduction in CSF3R-T618I allele frequency based on peripheral blood studies after approximately 4 months of ruxolitinib treatment. Single colony assays confirmed that the allele frequency was not significantly reduced.
    Discussion Here we report a case of CSF3R-T618I-positive aCML with a robust clinical response to JAK1/2 inhibition with ruxolitinib. The clinical benefit in this case was not merely leukoreduction but also improved marrow function as evident by near normalization of Hgb, MCV, and platelet counts. In addition, the patient had a significant reduction in spleen volume and constitutional symptoms, which were refractory to hydroxyurea. In the report by Maxson et al. [3] a clinical case of CSF3R-T618I-positive CNL was described where the patient also had platelet and Hgb improvement with ruxolitinib. These clinical cases suggest interesting differences between myelofibrosis (primary, post-polycythemia vera, and post-essential thrombocytosis) and CNL/aCML. As noted in the Comfort I study, a randomized placebo-controlled phase III clinical trial with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis, (1) thrombocytopenia is a dose-limiting toxicity, (2) WBC is not substantially reduced in myelofibrosis patients, and (3) marrow function is not measureably improved with ruxolitinib despite clinical responses (spleen and symptom reduction). One similarity is that the allele burden of the oncogenic driver is not significantly reduced with ruxolitinib [8].
    Acknowledgments KTD receives support from the OHSU Knight Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health, National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute (1K08HL111280). BJD is supported by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. JWT is supported by Grants from the V Foundation for Cancer Research, the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society, the Gabrielle׳s Angel Foundation for Cancer Research, and the National Cancer Institute (5R00CA151457 and 1R01CA183974).
    Introduction Human endogenous retroviruses (HERVs) are genetic remnants of ancient retroviral infections of the germ line produced during primate evolution which are now transmitted vertically. To date, approximately 8% of the human genome is composed of such retroviral sequences [1]. Most HERVs are dysfunctional due to numerous mutations and deletions. However, those belonging to HERV-K family, contain sequences which are likely to be transcribed. Many of these HERVs are transcribed and translated under normal physiological conditions. Nevertheless, reactivation of HERVs has frequently been observed in a variety of human tumors suggesting their potential to contribute to malignant progression [2]. Specifically during hemato-oncological processes, several studies have reported the presence of antibodies against HERV-K, overexpression of HERV genes and also the presence of retroviral particles in primary leukemia cells [2]. In addition, np9, a small regulatory gene encoded by HERV-K, has a role as a potent viral oncogene and as a critical molecular switch of multiple signaling pathways regulating the growth of certain human myeloid and lymphoblastic leukemia cells [3]. CLL is the most common form of leukemia in Western countries and mainly affects elderly individuals. It follows an extremely variable course, with survival ranging from months to decades. Available treatments often induce disease remission, but almost all patients will relapse and there is a consensus that CLL remains incurable. To date, both an unmutated (UM) profile of immunoglobulin (Ig) VH genes as well as the presence of genetic lesions at chromosome 17p13, or at 11q23 constitute poor prognosis indicators [4]. Several studies have begun to shed light on the nature of genetic predisposition of CLL but the basis of this disorder remains unknown [4,5]. Studies that screened for the presence of a virus expressed at the RNA level in human CLL, by using massive sequencing technology, gave no evidence of a putative exogenous viral candidate as a cause for this disease [6].