MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2292390406 · doi:10.1182/blood.v122.21.4071.4071

Baseline Characteristics and Symptom Burden in RESPONSE: A Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 Study of Ruxolitinib In Polycythemia Vera Patients Resistant to or Intolerant of Hydroxyurea

2013· article· en· W2292390406 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian, Martin Grießhammer, Tamás Masszi, Simon Durrant, Pierre Zachée, Fabrizio Pane, Claire Harrison, Shui He, Lance Leopold, Jingjin Li, Ulrich Pirron, Tomasz Lawniczek, Srđan Verstovšek

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2013
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPhlebotomyMedicineRuxolitinibPolycythemia veraInternal medicineHematocritPhases of clinical researchMyelofibrosisMyeloproliferative neoplasmClinical trialGastroenterologySurgeryBone marrow

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract Background Polycythemia vera (PV) is the most common of the myeloproliferative neoplasms and is characterized by elevated hematocrit requiring phlebotomy, splenomegaly, a variety of symptoms and increased thrombotic risk. Ruxolitinib, a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, was well tolerated and achieved rapid and durable clinical responses in a phase 2 study of patients (pts) with PV who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea (HU). Pts experienced phlebotomy independence, resolution of splenomegaly, and improvements in white blood cell (WBC) counts, platelet (PLT) counts, and disease-related symptoms. Here, we describe the baseline (BL) characteristics and symptom burden of pts in a phase 3 study of ruxolitinib in pts with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of HU. Methods RESPONSE is a randomized (1:1), open-label, phase 3 study (NCT01243944) comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy (BAT) in pts with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of HU (modified European LeukemiaNet criteria), have splenomegaly, and require phlebotomy for inadequate hematocrit (Hct) control. Fourteen disease-related symptoms were assessed on a scale of 0 (absent) to 10 (worst imaginable) using the modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF). Blinded data are presented here. Results BL demographic data are available for the 222 enrolled pts (Table). Apart from HU, other common prior medications for PV included interferons (15%), PLT aggregation inhibitors (10%), alkylating agents (3.6%), alkyl sulfonates (3.2%), pyrimidine analogues (1.8%), and nitrosoureas (1.4%). The majority of pts (54.5%) had 1 phlebotomy within 12 weeks prior to screening; 23.9% had 2 and 17.1% had 3 or more phlebotomies. RESPONSE BL demographics are generally similar in terms of age (60 years vs 57-67); sex (66% male vs 58%-68%); Hct (44% vs 45%-48%); and platelets (419 x 109/L vs 320-429 x 109/L) to other PV studies including trials of givinostat (Finazzi BJH 2013) and AOP2014 (Gisslinger ASH 2012) and the ECLAP-PV (Marchioli JCO 2005) and CYTO-PV studies (Marchioli NEJM 2012). At the time of writing, BL symptom data from the MPN-SAF were available for 164 pts (Table). Pts in this study reported a similar symptom burden as PV pts from a large study of pts with MPNs (Emanuel JCO 2012; N = 1425; PV, n = 538), including similar mean scores for early satiety, abdominal discomfort, concentration problems, night sweats, itching, and tiredness/fatigue. In addition, prior therapy may have adversely affected BL symptom burden, as many of these symptoms (concentration problems, night sweats, fatigue) have been shown to be worsened by the use of conventional therapy to strictly control Hct (< 45%) and cardiovascular risk (Emanuel EHA 2013). BL MPN-SAF symptom data for all 222 pts will be presented. In addition, correlations between BL EORTC QLQ-C30 and MPN-SAF scores will be presented. Summary/Conclusions Demographic and BL symptom data from the RESPONSE study demonstrated that pts with HU refractory or intolerant PV have a significant disease burden that includes a variety of symptoms. These findings are consistent with those of Emanuel (JCO 2012), which showed that pts with PV have a significant symptom burden and a reduced quality of life. Pts with PV in the RESPONSE study are representative of those who have been studied in other clinical trials for the treatment of PV. Disclosures: Vannucchi: Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Ruxolitinib, a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor, has been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of intermediate- or high-risk MF and by the European Commission and Health Canada for the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adult patients with MF. Here, we describe the baseline (BL) characteristics and symptom burden of patients in a phase 3 study of ruxolitinib in patients with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of HU. Kiladjian:Novartis: Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria. Durrant:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Pane:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Shire: Honoraria. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; YM Bioscience: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau; SBio: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Honoraria, Membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees. He:Incyte: Employment. Leopold:Incyte: Employment, Stock options Other. Li:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pirron:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lawniczek:Novartis: Employment. Verstovsek:Incyte: Research Funding.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Essai randomisé · Signal consensuel: Essai randomisé
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,004
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,012

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,023
Tête enseignante GPT0,319
Écart entre enseignants0,296 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeEssai randomisé
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations9
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207