The field of multiple myeloma has transformed from having few treatments to an abundance of effective drugs. The primary clinical challenge is no longer finding a therapy that works, but rather determining the optimal sequence and combination of available options, highlighting a unique form of market maturity.

Non-covalent BTK inhibitors like pirtobrutinib are currently approved for use after covalent BTK inhibitors fail. Moving them to the frontline setting, as studied in BRUIN-313, disrupts the established treatment pathway and creates uncertainty for managing relapsed disease, as the standard 'next step' is removed.

Clinicians can reassure myelofibrosis patients that the drop in hemoglobin often seen when starting ruxolitinib does not carry the same negative prognostic weight as anemia caused by the disease itself. This distinction is crucial for managing patient expectations and continuing effective therapy despite initial side effects.

A diagnosis of myelofibrosis without a JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutation should be treated as a red flag, not a final diagnosis. It warrants a deeper investigation for alternative causes, such as MDS/MPN overlap syndromes or secondary fibrosis from other conditions like autoimmune disease or hairy cell leukemia.

While beneficial for patients with prior weight loss, ruxolitinib can cause significant weight gain (20-30 pounds) in other myelofibrosis patients. This quality-of-life issue should be discussed proactively, as it can become a major concern, effectively trading one disease state for another.

For myelofibrosis patients with profound splenomegaly but only moderate thrombocytopenia (platelets 50k-100k), fedratinib may be the best frontline option. It is arguably the most potent JAK inhibitor for spleen reduction and is approved for use in patients with platelet counts as low as 50,000.

To combat the significant myelosuppression from the standard 28-day venetoclax cycle in AML, many clinicians are adopting a strategy of performing a bone marrow biopsy around day 21 and pausing the drug if blast clearance is achieved to allow for hematologic recovery.

The common practice of switching from one ARPI to another upon disease progression is now considered ineffective for most patients. With the advent of proven alternatives like chemotherapy and lutetium, using an "ARPI switch" as the sole control arm in clinical trials is no longer ethically or scientifically sound.

While pirtobrutinib is effective after covalent BTK inhibitors, the reverse is unproven. Starting with pirtobrutinib frontline raises a critical unanswered question about whether patients will still respond to older covalent inhibitors, complicating sequencing decisions, especially for younger patients.