IPSS risk groups and ECOG performance status
ONCOLOGY
International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS) groups were remarkably different from the COMFORT-II trial. Altogether, 12%, 24%, 41%, and 23% of patients were judged by their investigators to belong to the low-risk, int-1–risk, int-2–risk, and high-risk groups, respectively; however, there was a large fraction of patients (270/464 = 58%) not assigned to any IPSS group by an investigator. When we calculated the IPSS using the individual data provided in the electronic case report form (which was only possible for 108/464 patients, due to missing data), the fraction of low-risk to int-1–risk patients was confirmed to be around 39%, thus differing remarkably from the COMFORT-II trial, which only included int-2–risk and high-risk patients. Despite their lower risk scores, our cohort contained fewer patients not limited by their Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status (ECOG 0) and a higher proportion of patients with an ECOG performance status 2–3 compared with COMFORT-II. Because of our permissive inclusion criteria, the JAKoMo cohort unbiasedly reflects the current population of MF patients receiving RUX in Germany.