Profile of patients with Myelodysplastic syndrome: A report from a tertiary care teaching hospital from Eastern India

Objectives: Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a group of myeloid neoplasms. The clinical manifestations and treatments vary depending on the subtype and risk stratification of the disease. There is a paucity of data on Indian patients with MDS. This study was undertaken to understand MDS with regard to their clinical presentation, pathological, cytogenetic profiles and also to assess their therapeutic outcomes and prognosis from our center in Eastern India. Material and Methods: This is a prospective observational study conducted in the department of hematology at a tertiary care teaching hospital from eastern part of India. The diagnosis of MDS was made from the peripheral blood examination, bone marrow aspirate examination, cytogenetics, and Fluorescence in situ hybridization results, according to the WHO guidelines. Patients were risk stratified using Revised International Prognostic Scoring System (R-IPSS) and subsequent therapeutic planning was done, with either supportive therapy in the form of recombinant human erythropoiesis stimulating agents, colony stimulating factors, packed red blood cell support as needed for low risk MDS patients. High risk patients were treated with hypomethylating agents such as Azacytidine, Decitabine, or Lenalidomide. Results: The mean duration of follow-up of patients with MDS from the point of diagnosis was 1.8 years (range 4 months–6 years). The median OS was 1.33 years. The median OS in the analysis of our patient cohort with low, intermediate, high, and very high R-IPSS was 1.67 years, 1.33 years, 1.67 years, and 1.67 years, respectively. No patients of very low risk group were identified in our study. Conclusion: Our findings reflect that MDS-MLD with low or intermediate R-IPSS risk groups is the most common types of MDS. Although supportive therapy was used to treat patients irrespective of other therapy given (depending on the risk group of the patient), it was used alone even in higher risk groups due to logistic reasons in some cases. Those patients who received supportive care alone also had a good survival duration. However, a longer follow-up duration is required to firmly establish this outcome. The median age of patients (55 years) was also lower than established studies with a median overall survival of 1.67 years.