Skip to main content
. 2022 Mar 31;57(1):59–68. doi: 10.5045/br.2021.2021209

Table 2.

Clinical features of patients with essential thrombocythemia and polycythemia vera who developed myelofibrosis.

ET (N=10) PV (N=11)
At ET diagnosis At SMF diagnosis P a) At PV diagnosis At SMF diagnosis P a)
Age (yr), median (range) 62 (51–75) 70 (63–83) 61 (36–75) 73 (52–85)
Palpable splenomegaly, N (%) 0 (0.0) 6 (60.0) <0.001 4 (36.4) 5 (45.5) 1.000
Laboratory findings
WBC, ×109/L 7.0±6.0 8.6±6.1 0.101 15.1±7.7 20.9±21.7 0.384
Monocyte, ×109/L 0.8±0.4 0.4±0.5 0.118 1.1±0.6 1.6±2.3 0.598
Hemoglobin, g/dL 12.9±2.5 8.9±1.5 0.001 17.3±3.1 10.6±1.4 0.001
Platelet, ×109/L 667.0±845.7 527.8±486.8 0.033 626.7±426.3 399.3±401.2 0.154
Leukoerythroblastosis, N (%) 0 (0.0) 8 (80.0) <0.001 0 (0.0) 10 (90.9) <0.001
LDH, ×UNL 1.3±0.6 2.8±1.2 0.004 1.1±1.1 2.2±0.6 0.037
Abnormal karyotype, N (%) 0 (0.0) 3 (30.0) <0.001 2 (18.2) 6 (54.5) 0.076

a)Data presented as mean±SD were analyzed using Student’s t-test for paired samples; data presented as percentages were analyzed using the chi-square test.

Abbreviations: ET, essential thrombocythemia; LDH, lactate dehydrogenase; SMF, secondary myelofibrosis; UNL, upper normal limit.