MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2530902519 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.2799.2799

Safety and Efficacy of Ruxolitinib in an 1869-Patient Cohort of JUMP: An Open-Label, Multicenter, Single-Arm, Expanded-Access Study in Patients with Myelofibrosis

2015· article· en· W2530902519 sur OpenAlexaff
Renato Tavares Daher, Giuseppe A. Palumbo, Philipp le Coutre, Francesca Palandri, Haifa Kathrin Al‐Ali, Bruno Martino, Anna Marina Liberati, Massimo Breccia, David Brittain, Lynda Foltz, Martin Grießhammer, Pia Raanani, Vikas Gupta, Pilar Giraldo, Jagannath Ghosh, Bayane Tannir, Julian Perez Ronco, Alessandro M. Vannucchi

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineRuxolitinibMyelofibrosisInternal medicineTolerabilityClinical endpointPhases of clinical researchMedian follow-upSurgeryInternational Prognostic Scoring SystemClinical trialAdverse effectChemotherapyBone marrowMyelodysplastic syndromes

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND: Ruxolitinib (RUX) is a potent JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor that demonstrated improvements in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms, as well as improved survival, in patients (pts) with intermediate (Int)-2- or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF), and has proved superior to placebo and best available therapy in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. JUMP is an expanded-access phase 3b trial designed to assess the safety and efficacy of RUX in pts with MF and includes patients with no access to RUX outside a clinical trial. As of Dec 2014, final enrollment was 2233 pts in 26 countries. METHODS: Eligible pts had Int-2- or high-risk MF with or without splenomegaly, or Int-1-risk MF with a palpable spleen (≥ 5 cm from the costal margin). Pts received starting doses of RUX based on platelet counts at baseline (5 mg twice daily [bid; ≥ 50 to < 100 × 109/L], 15 mg bid [100 to 200 × 109/L], or 20 mg bid [> 200 × 109/L]). The primary endpoint was assessment of safety and tolerability of RUX. Additional analyses included changes in palpable spleen length and symptom scores as measured by the FACT-Lymphoma total score (FACT-Lym TS). The final analysis will be performed after all pts have completed 24 months of treatment or discontinued the study. RESULTS: This analysis includes 1869 pts (primary MF, 59.1%; n = 1105) who started treatment ≥ 1 year before the data cutoff date (01 Jan 2015). At baseline, median age was 67 y (range, 18-89 y); 54.1% were male; median palpable spleen length was 12 cm below the costal margin; 87 pts did not have splenomegaly. Median hemoglobin (Hb) was 106 g/L, and 38.9% of pts had Hb levels ˂ 100 g/L; median platelet count was 257 × 109/L; mean FACT-Lym TS and FACIT-Fatigue score were 113.7 and 33.2, respectively. At data cutoff, 37.0% of pts remained on treatment; 26.1% had completed treatment per protocol. Primary reasons for discontinuation included adverse events (AEs; 17.4%), disease progression (8.2%), and death (3.4%). Median exposure was 13.6 months; the median average daily dose was 36.7 mg for pts starting at 20 mg bid (n = 1168; 62.5%) and 23.2 mg for pts starting at 15 mg bid (n = 559; 29.9%). The majority of pts (66.0%) had dose modifications, and 26.2% had a dose interruption. Grade 3/4 hematologic AEs included anemia (34.0%), thrombocytopenia (14.9%), and neutropenia (3.9%), which led to discontinuation in 2.2%, 3.3%, and 0.2% of pts, respectively. The most common nonhematologic AEs (≥ 10%) were pyrexia (14.5%), asthenia (13.8%), diarrhea (12.4%), and fatigue (10.3%), and were primarily grade 1/2; grade 3/4 AEs were low overall (≤ 2%), except pneumonia (3.9%), which led to discontinuation in 9 pts (0.5%). Rates of infections were low; all-grade infections ≥ 5% included pneumonia (6.2%), urinary tract infection (5.7%), and nasopharyngitis (5.3%). Tuberculosis was reported in 5 pts (0.3%; grade 3/4, 0.1%); hepatitis B was reported in 1 pt (0.1%; grade 3/4, 0.1%). At wk 24 and 48, 57.2% (742/1297) and 62.0% (588/949) of pts with baseline splenomegaly achieved a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in palpable spleen length; 22.9% (297/1297) and 19.0% (180/949) had 25% to 50% reductions, respectively. Most pts (70.5%; 1208/1713) experienced a ≥ 50% reduction at any time; 23.3% (399/1713) had complete resolution of splenomegaly (Figure). At wk 24 and 48, 96.6% (57/59) and 91.5% (43/47) of evaluable pts without splenomegaly at baseline continued to have a nonpalpable spleen; 1.7% (1/59) and 4.3% (2/47) had a spleen that was 0-5 cm, and 1.7% (1/59) and 4.3% (2/47) had a spleen ≥ 5 cm. A large proportion of pts achieved a response (ie, a clinically significant improvement) on the FACT-Lym TS and FACIT-Fatigue at wk 24 (43.0% [525/1220]; 47.1% [593/1258]) and wk 48 (43.2% [368/852]; 45.7% [396/867]). Similar responses were seen in pts without a palpable spleen (FACT-Lym TS: wk 24, 44.0% [22/50]; wk 48, 36.1% [13/36]; FACIT-Fatigue: wk 24, 49.1% [27/55]; wk 48, 35.1% [13/37]). CONCLUSIONS: To date, JUMP includes the largest cohort of pts with MF treated with RUX. Consistent with previous findings, anemia and thrombocytopenia were the most common AEs but rarely led to discontinuation. As observed previously, most pts experienced reductions in splenomegaly and symptoms with RUX treatment. Clinically meaningful improvements in symptoms were also seen in pts with no palpable spleen, a pt group not included in the COMFORT studies. Overall, the safety and efficacy profile of RUX in JUMP is consistent with that in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. Disclosures Palumbo: Novartis: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board. Le Coutre:Novartis: Honoraria. Al-Ali:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Ullrich:Novartis: Honoraria. Brittain:Astellas: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pierre Fabre: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Foltz:Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding. Raanani:Bristol-Myers Squibb: Other: Advisory Board; Novartis: Other: Advisory Board, Research Funding; Ariad: Other: Advisory Board; Pfizer: Other: Advisory Board. Gupta:Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Ghosh:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Tannir:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Perez Ronco:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Vannucchi:Novartis: Other: Research Funding paid to institution (University of Florence), Research Funding; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Baxalta: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

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)0,001
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: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,002
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,007

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

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

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 Opus0,053
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,276 · 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'étudeObservationnel
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
Publié2015
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207