Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 15, 2026

An R-Based Landscape Validation of a Competing Risk Model
Published on: September 16, 2022
Prognostic risk models for transplant decision-making in myelofibrosis
Juan-Carlos Hernández-Boluda1, Arturo Pereira2, Juan-Gonzalo Correa3
1Hematology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario, INCLIVA, Avd. Blasco Ibáñez 17, 46010, Valencia, Spain. hernandez_jca@gva.es.
Abstract:
Prognostic models are widely used in clinical practice for transplant decision-making in myelofibrosis (MF). We have compared the performance of the International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS), dynamic IPSS (DIPSS), and DIPSS-plus in a series of 544 patients with primary or secondary MF aged ≤ 70 years at the time of diagnosis. The median projected survival of the overall series was 9.46 years (95% confidence interval 7.44-10.59). Median survival for the highest risk groups was less than 4 years in the three prognostic models. By contrast, the projected survival for patients in the intermediate-2 categories by the IPSS, DIPSS, and DIPSS-plus was 6.6, 5.6, and 6.5 years, respectively. The number of patients in the intermediate-2 and high-risk categories was smaller in the DIPSS than in the IPSS or the DIPSS-plus. The IPSS and DIPSS-plus were the best models to discriminate between the intermediate-1 and intermediate-2 risk categories, which is a critical cut-off point for patient selection to transplant. Among patients assigned at diagnosis to the intermediate-2 or high-risk groups by the IPSS, DIPSS, and DIPSS-plus, only 17, 21, and 20%, respectively, were subsequently transplanted. In conclusion, in our contemporary series of younger MF patients only the highest risk categories of the current prognostication systems have a median survival below the 5-year threshold recommended for considering transplantation. Patient selection for transplantation can significantly differ depending on which prognostication model is used for disease risk stratification.
Related Concept Videos
Decision Making
Automatic decision-making is fast, intuitive, and relies on gut feelings...
Relative Risk
Impact of Pharmacokinetic–Pharmacodynamic Models: Regulatory Decisions
Decision Making: P-value Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is proposed. The claim is based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to the claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses: a null hypothesis would be a neutral statement while the alternative hypothesis can...
Factors Affecting the Risk of Infection
The integrity and count of the white blood cells help the body resist pathogens and fight infection. When impaired, it reduces the body's resistance to pathogens. The acidic pH levels of the gastrointestinal, genitourinary tracts, and skin...
Decision Making: Traditional Method
First, a specific claim about the population parameter is decided based on the research question and is stated in a simple form. Further, an opposing statement to this claim is also stated. These statements can act as null and alternative hypotheses, out of which a null hypothesis would be a...

