MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2916182471 · doi:10.1182/blood-2018-99-111479

Updated Results from an Open-Label, Multicenter, Expanded Treatment Protocol (ETP) Phase (Ph) 3b Study of Ruxolitinib (RUX) in Patients (Pts) with Polycythemia Vera (PV) Who Were Hydroxyurea (HU) Resistant or Intolerant and for Whom No Alternative Treatment (Tx) Was Available

2018· article· en· W2916182471 sur OpenAlexaffabout
Lynda Foltz, Gian-Matteo Pica, Hacène Zerazhi, Jan Van Droogenbroeck, Sorin Visanica, Enrique Báez de la Fuente, Brian Leber, António Almeida, Dana Ranta, Mauricio Reyes Cartes, Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian, Linda Chrit, Zhaoyu Yin, Juliane Morando, Timothy Devos

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2018
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensMcMaster UniversityUniversity of British Columbia
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineDiscontinuationRuxolitinibPopulationInternal medicineClinical endpointGastroenterologySurgeryClinical trialPediatricsMyelofibrosisBone marrow

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Few Tx options are available for pts with inadequately controlled PV. European LeukemiaNet defined resistance/intolerance was seen in ≈25% pts treated with HU (Alvarez-Larran et al, 2012). In the HU-resistant/intolerant PV pts evaluated in the pivotal RESPONSE study (week [wk] 208), RUX was well tolerated and superior to standard therapy in achieving durable hematocrit (HCT) control, hematologic response, and spleen size and symptom reductions. This Ph 3b ETP study was planned to provide RUX Tx to HU-resistant/intolerant PV pts, who have no alternative standard Tx, and are not eligible for any ongoing clinical studies. Results from wk 24 data cutoff of this study (Devos et al) were presented at ASH 2017. Here, we report consolidated findings from the ETP study at wk 96 data cutoff (Dec 29, 2017 [final database lock]) to further support the use of RUX in this pt population with an unmet medical need. METHODS RUX Tx was initiated at a starting dose of 10 mg bid (could be titrated to a maximum of 25 mg bid). Visits were scheduled every 4 wks until wk 24 and every 12 wks thereafter; final analysis was done when all pts had been followed for 30 days after discontinuation of Tx or completion of Tx per protocol (transitioned to commercial RUX or until Dec 31, 2017, whichever date occurred first). The primary endpoint was to assess the safety of RUX. Secondary endpoints included change in HCT level, change in spleen length, and pt-reported outcomes (change in MPN-SAF TSS score). HCT control at wk 24 was defined by absence of phlebotomy (PBT) eligibility starting at wk 8 and continuing through wk 24, with no more than 1 PBT eligibility occurring after first dose date and prior to wk 8. PBT eligibility was defined by confirmed HCT >45% (at least 3 percentage points higher than HCT at baseline [BL]), or confirmed HCT >48%. Blood count remission at wk 24 was defined by HCT control, and white blood cell count <10 × 109/L, and platelet count ≤400 × 109/L. RESULTS At data cutoff, 161 pts with PV were enrolled (BL characteristics similar to that presented at ASH 2017). End of Tx was reported for all 161 pts: Tx duration completed per protocol (141 pts), adverse event (AE [12 pts]), consent withdrawal (3 pts), pt decision (2 pts), disease progression (2 pts), and death (due to accident [1 pt]). The median exposure was 25.1 wks (range, 0.4-104.7), and median dose intensity of RUX was 20.0 mg/day (range, 6.7-47.7). AEs (regardless of study drug relationship) led to dose adjustment/interruption in 37.9% pts and study drug discontinuation in 8.7% pts. The most common hematologic AEs (rate=number of events per 100 pt-year exposure [pt-year exposure=110.2]; all grades]) included anemia (31.8) and thrombocytosis (10.0), while headache (24.5), diarrhea (14.5), constipation (12.7), and fatigue (12.7) were the most frequent non-hematologic AEs. For all reported grade 3/4 AEs, exposure-adjusted rate was less than 3. Thromboembolic events (all grade; Standardized MedDRA Query) were reported in 3 pts. Disease progression was reported in 4 pts (myelofibrosis=3 pts; acute myeloid leukemia=1 pt). The incidence of other neoplasms (regardless of study drug relationship) was low (leiomyoma, malignant melanoma, marginal zone lymphoma, renal cancer [1 pt each]; squamous cell carcinoma [2 pts]; basal cell carcinoma [3 pts]). Infections (all grades) were reported in 57 pts (grade 3/4 in 5 pts). At wk 24, 73 pts (45.3% [95% CI, 37.5%-53.4%]) achieved HCT control; hematologic remission was seen in 29 pts (18% [95% CI 12.4%-24.8%]). Changes in blood count parameters over time are shown in Fig. 1. In evaluable pts (N=105), use of PBT decreased from BL (39 PBTs between screening and BL) to end of Tx (5 PBTs in 12 wks prior). Best spleen response from BL for each pt by wk 96 is shown in Fig. 2. At least 50% spleen length reduction was seen in 86.7% (78/90) of pts from BL at any time in the study. Overall, 33.8% (46/136) of pts had ≥50% reduction in MPN-SAF TSS from BL at the end of Tx. CONCLUSION The observed safety profile of RUX in the ETP study was consistent with that of the RESPONSE studies. Efficacy results were close to the observed values in the RESPONSE studies. RUX Tx resulted in HCT control, hematologic remission, spleen response, and symptom reduction in this HU-resistant/intolerant pt population in need of a viable Tx option. Safety and efficacy findings from this ETP study support the use of RUX for pts with inadequately controlled PV, an unmet medical need. Disclosures Foltz: Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; Promedior: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding. Leber:Novartis Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis Canada: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. de Almeida:Celgene: Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Ranta:Novartis: Consultancy. Cartes:Novartis: Honoraria. Kiladjian:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AOP Orphan: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Chrit:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Yin:Novartis: Employment. Morando:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Devos:Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy.

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)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,009
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 non randomisé · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,010
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,051

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,009
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0050,001

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 Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,367
Écart entre enseignants0,309 · 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 non 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

Citations3
Publié2018
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207