Background: The treatment landscape for myelofibrosis (MF) has evolved significantly, with an increasing number of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) that enable more personalized care. As such, healthcare professionals (HCPs) must navigate the nuances of selecting optimal JAKi for each patient and determining when it is appropriate to switch to another agent. Toward this end, we developed a multimodal educational program to equip hematology/oncology (heme/onc) HCPs with the knowledge needed to individualize management of patients with MF, focusing on the current use of JAKi to improve patient outcomes.

Methods: From September 2024-June 2025, we deployed and monitored a comprehensive educational program for heme/onc HCPs on the use of JAKi for MF. We conducted a pre-education survey and, based on the results, hosted 2 collaborative workshops, each with 1 expert faculty moderator and 5 heme/onc physicians, to facilitate discussion, experience sharing, and qualitative data collection. Based on quantitative (pre/post surveys) and qualitative (workshop transcripts and exit interviews) data, we hosted a series of accredited, expert-led live Grand Rounds–style presentations for healthcare teams (including physicians, physician associates, nurses, nurse practicioners, and pharmacists) in academic- and community-based practices across the United States informed by the educational needs identified by workshop participants related to the care of patients with MF. We posted 2 accredited on-demand webcasts from the live events as enduring education. This activity included polling questions designed to assess key aspects of HCP knowledge and competence in using JAKi in clinical practice identified in the workshops.

Results: In September 2024, 10 HCPs participated in collaborative workshops, identifying 3 key gaps in the current use of JAKi including 1) understanding which JAKi is best as first-line therapy for individual patients with MF; 2) selecting optimal second-line JAKi therapy for patients based on specific patient factors; 3) optimal use of early interventions for prophylactic management of adverse events (AEs) associated with JAKi. Participants reported increased confidence in comparing and selecting JAKi, managing treatment-related toxicities, identifying and addressing treatment failure, and implementing personalized treatment approaches.

From January 2025-April 2025, 784 HCPs participated in 15 ACCME/ACPE/ANCC/AAPA-certified live events and an additional 204 HCPs accessed a certified, on-demand recorded video of the live events. As a result of this education, relative improvements were observed in selecting guideline- and expert-concordant answers to pre/post quesitons on: 1) individualizing front-line therapy with ruxolitinib dosing (30% baseline vs 71% post education; P <.001); 2) optimal use of front-line pacritinib for patients with MF and low platelet count (20% baseline vs 62% post education; P <.001); 3) sequencing JAKi for second-line therapy (eg, pacritinib, momelotinib, fedratinib) based on patient characteristics (34% baseline vs 69% post education; P <.001) and, 4) recognizing and effectively managing treatment-related AEs in patients receiving JAKi therapies (37% baseline vs 69% post education; P <.001). As a result of this education, 46% of participants from the live and recorded education indicated that they intended to change practice.

Of importance, participants of both the collaborative learning workshops and the accredited, expert-led live/virtual Grand Rounds–style presentations indicated that “hearing the collective experience [of other HCPs] helps to incorporate what other people are doing in clinical practice” and that this educational format “opened opportunities for peer collaboration and expert consultation to reinforce management strategies for patients with MF”.Conclusions: HCP confidence, knowledge, and competence in personalizing JAKi therapy for patients with MF was improved following participation in this multimodal educational program. This educational initiative demonstrated that integrating quantitative and qualitative insights from collaborative workshops that engage community-based oncologists can be leveraged to successfully design subsequent structured educational activities. Overall, these results illustrate the utility of community-informed education to improve HCP knowledge and clinical expertise, enabling HCPs to make informed decisions that could significantly improve patient outcomes.

This content is only available as a PDF.
2025
Sign in via your Institution