Maximilian Stahl , Jan Philipp Bewersdorf , Zhuoer Xie , Matteo Giovanni Della Porta , Rami Komrokji , Mina L. Xu , Omar Abdel-Wahab , Justin Taylor , David P. Steensma , Daniel T. Starczynowski , Mikkael A. Sekeres , Guillermo Sanz , David A. Sallman , Gail J. Roboz , Uwe Platzbecker , Mrinal M. Patnaik , Eric Padron , Olatoyosi Odenike , Stephen D. Nimer , Aziz Nazha , Amer M. Zeidan
{"title":"骨髓增生异常综合征/肿瘤(MDS)的分类、风险分层和反应评估:代表国际MDS协会(icMDS)的最新报告","authors":"Maximilian Stahl , Jan Philipp Bewersdorf , Zhuoer Xie , Matteo Giovanni Della Porta , Rami Komrokji , Mina L. Xu , Omar Abdel-Wahab , Justin Taylor , David P. Steensma , Daniel T. Starczynowski , Mikkael A. Sekeres , Guillermo Sanz , David A. Sallman , Gail J. Roboz , Uwe Platzbecker , Mrinal M. Patnaik , Eric Padron , Olatoyosi Odenike , Stephen D. Nimer , Aziz Nazha , Amer M. Zeidan","doi":"10.1016/j.blre.2023.101128","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The guidelines for classification, prognostication, and response assessment of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) have all recently been updated. In this report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) we summarize these developments. We first critically examine the updated World Health Organization (WHO) classification and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of MDS. We then compare traditional and molecularly based risk MDS risk assessment tools. Lastly, we discuss limitations of criteria in measuring therapeutic benefit and highlight how the International Working Group (IWG) 2018 and 2023 response criteria addressed these deficiencies and are endorsed by the icMDS. We also address the importance of patient centered care by discussing the value of quality-of-life assessment. We hope that the reader of this review will have a better understanding of how to classify MDS, predict clinical outcomes and evaluate therapeutic outcomes.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":56139,"journal":{"name":"Blood Reviews","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":6.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Classification, risk stratification and response assessment in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): A state-of-the-art report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS)\",\"authors\":\"Maximilian Stahl , Jan Philipp Bewersdorf , Zhuoer Xie , Matteo Giovanni Della Porta , Rami Komrokji , Mina L. Xu , Omar Abdel-Wahab , Justin Taylor , David P. Steensma , Daniel T. Starczynowski , Mikkael A. Sekeres , Guillermo Sanz , David A. Sallman , Gail J. Roboz , Uwe Platzbecker , Mrinal M. Patnaik , Eric Padron , Olatoyosi Odenike , Stephen D. Nimer , Aziz Nazha , Amer M. Zeidan\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.blre.2023.101128\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>The guidelines for classification, prognostication, and response assessment of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) have all recently been updated. In this report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) we summarize these developments. We first critically examine the updated World Health Organization (WHO) classification and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of MDS. We then compare traditional and molecularly based risk MDS risk assessment tools. Lastly, we discuss limitations of criteria in measuring therapeutic benefit and highlight how the International Working Group (IWG) 2018 and 2023 response criteria addressed these deficiencies and are endorsed by the icMDS. We also address the importance of patient centered care by discussing the value of quality-of-life assessment. We hope that the reader of this review will have a better understanding of how to classify MDS, predict clinical outcomes and evaluate therapeutic outcomes.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Blood Reviews\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Blood Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268960X23000899\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEMATOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0268960X23000899","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Classification, risk stratification and response assessment in myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS): A state-of-the-art report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS)
The guidelines for classification, prognostication, and response assessment of myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms (MDS) have all recently been updated. In this report on behalf of the International Consortium for MDS (icMDS) we summarize these developments. We first critically examine the updated World Health Organization (WHO) classification and the International Consensus Classification (ICC) of MDS. We then compare traditional and molecularly based risk MDS risk assessment tools. Lastly, we discuss limitations of criteria in measuring therapeutic benefit and highlight how the International Working Group (IWG) 2018 and 2023 response criteria addressed these deficiencies and are endorsed by the icMDS. We also address the importance of patient centered care by discussing the value of quality-of-life assessment. We hope that the reader of this review will have a better understanding of how to classify MDS, predict clinical outcomes and evaluate therapeutic outcomes.
期刊介绍:
Blood Reviews, a highly regarded international journal, serves as a vital information hub, offering comprehensive evaluations of clinical practices and research insights from esteemed experts. Specially commissioned, peer-reviewed articles authored by leading researchers and practitioners ensure extensive global coverage across all sub-specialties of hematology.