Retrospective cohort study shows azacitidine improves survival and delays leukemic transformation in patients with HR-MDS, suggesting a beneficial treatment strategy.
Background: Higher-risk myelodysplastic neoplasms ( HR-MDS) are associated with poor survival and a substantial risk of leukemic transformation. Although azacitidine is a standard treatment in this setting, comparative real-world data remain limited. We evaluated the association between azacitidine exposure and clinical outcomes in patients with HR-MDS. Methods: We performed a retrospective single-center cohort study including 72 adults with HR-MDS, defined by the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System(IPSS-R) as High or Very High risk. Patients were categorized as azacitidine-treated (Aza, n = 44) or managed with best supportive care alone (No Aza, n = 28). Overall survival (OS) was defined from diagnosis to death from any cause. Progression-free survival (PFS) was defined as the time to acute myeloid leukemia transformation or death. Leukemic transformation (LT) was analyzed using Kaplan–Meier estimates and competing-risk cumulative incidence, with death without prior LT treated as a competing event. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression models were applied. Results: Azacitidine exposure was associated with longer OS compared with best supportive care, with a median OS of 13 vs.10 months and 24-month OS rates of 27% vs. 14% (p = 0.0239). PFS was also prolonged in the Aza group, with a median of 11 vs. 7 months (p = 0.0406). LT-related outcomes similarly favored azacitidine. In multivariable analyses, azacitidine remained independently associated with improved OS, PFS, and LT-related outcomes. IPSS-R Very High risk remained an adverse prognostic factor across endpoints, while a higher baseline bone marrow blast percentage independently predicted leukemic transformation. Conclusions: In this real-world HR-MDS cohort, azacitidine exposure was associated with improved survival outcomes and delayed leukemic transformation compared with best supportive care alone.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lapadat et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: