Efficacy and Safety of 2L therapies for RS+ patients
Video Player is loading.
- Please discuss the efficacy and safety findings from studies supporting currently available 2L therapies and how they inform your treatment choices for patients who are RS positive:
- IMerge (Platzbecker et al. Lancet 2024) (Santini et al. EHA 2024, Abstr. S184)
- MEDALIST (Fenaux et al. NEJM 2020) (Santini et al. ASH 2023, Abstr. 915)
- Please describe the similarities/differences between the two trials regarding the data related to defining transfusion independence.
- Compare/contrast the data from IMerge and MEDALIST for patients based on whether they received (a) 2 to <4 units, (b) 4 to <6, or (c) ≥6 units every 8 weeks
Recent Videos
COMFORT Trials: Applying Evidence to Intermediate-Risk Myelofibrosis
Myelofibrosis Management: Clinical Approaches and Treatment Algorithms With Case-Based Application
Clinical Impact of COCOON: Advancing Dermatologic AE Management
Clinical Decision-Making Framework for Initiating Myelofibrosis Therapy
Clinical Approaches for Dermatologic AEs Associated With Amivantamab + Lazertinib in Advanced NSCLC
Prognostic Stratification on Myelofibrosis: From Models to Clinical Application
Ruxolitinib Therapy for cGVHD: Insights on Patient and Safety Monitoring
Personalized JAK Inhibitor Selection in Myelofibrosis: Clinical Characteristics, Molecular Profiles, and Treatment Sequencing
Advancing Treatment Paradigms in Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: From Molecular Pathogenesis to Patient-Tailored Therapy
Diagnostic Challenges in Myelofibrosis: Distinguishing Prefibrotic Disease
Related Content
