MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4389232132 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-173942

Meter: A Multi-Country, Real-World Chart Review Study to Explore Treatment Patterns, Effectiveness and Healthcare Resource Utilization for Patients with Myelofibrosis

2023· article· en· W4389232132 sur OpenAlexaff
Vikas Gupta, Ciprian Tomuleasa, Gilberto Barranco-Lampón, Hsin‐An Hou, Grzegorz Helbig, Argiris Symeonidis, İbrahim C. Haznedaroğlu, Kenny Gálvez, Fernando Tatsch, Avijeet Chopra, Meng Zhang, Tamas Vizkelety, David M. Ross

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicineMyelofibrosisRuxolitinibDiscontinuationExtramedullary hematopoiesisConstitutional symptomsInternal medicineClinical trialOncologyIntensive care medicineBone marrowDiseaseHaematopoiesis

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background : Myelofibrosis (MF) is a rare myeloproliferative disorder associated with significant morbidity and mortality. The hallmarks of MF pathobiology include aberrant myeloproliferation, cytokine-induced inflammation, bone marrow reticulin fibrosis, extramedullary hematopoiesis, cytopenias, and constitutional symptoms. Hydroxyurea was the most commonly used drug in patients with MF prior to the approval of ruxolitinib (RUX), a first-in-class Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor (JAKi) that is widely approved for symptomatic patients with MF. In addition to RUX, the JAKis fedratinib and, more recently, pacritinib have also been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration. Real-world treatment patterns and impact of currently available JAKis on patients with MF are not well understood. Several novel agents are in advanced development and will further reshape the treatment landscape of MF. A better understanding of current treatment patterns will assist in positioning novel treatments within the MF therapeutic landscape. Methods : The METER study (NCT05444972) is an ongoing multicountry noninterventional retrospective chart review assessing treatment patterns, effectiveness, and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) in patients diagnosed with MF. Data from patients aged ≥18 years with primary or secondary MF treated on or after the local first date of RUX approval until December 31 , 2021 were assessed. Patients who received treatment for MF in a clinical trial were excluded. The primary objective is to describe real-world MF treatment patterns, including patient characteristics, time from MF diagnosis to first-line (1L) therapy, choice, duration and reason for change/discontinuation of initial and subsequent treatments for MF, and treatment procedures. Secondary objectives include assessments of days hospitalized as part of HCRU. Results : As of June 1, 2023, 928 patient charts were included, met eligibility criteria, and had initial treatment information available. Most patients were male (54%) and White (65%), and the median (range) age for patients ≤89 years of age was 66 (58-73) years; the most common geographic locations were Europe (53%), Latin America (23%), and North America (13%). Of patients, 66% (614/928) had primary MF, and 10% (97/928) were transfusion-dependent. Of patients tested for high molecular risk mutations, 50% (81/162) were positive. Of patients with available bone marrow fibrosis data, 82% (554/680) had grade ≥2 bone marrow fibrosis at diagnosis. The average interval from MF diagnosis to start of initial treatment (index date) was approximately 8.5 months. RUX was the most commonly used 1L therapy (47%; 437/928) followed by hydroxyurea (41%; 380/928). RUX was also the most common therapy used in second-line (2L), third-line, fourth-line, and fifth-line treatment for 62% (217/353), 63% (107/171), 66% (56/85), and 59% (24/41) of patients, respectively. Mean (SD) time from index date to procedural intervention was 556 (519) days; the most common procedure was stem cell transplant (n = 71) followed by splenectomy (n = 20). Of the 927 patients who received 1L therapy, 98% remained on 1L therapy through Week 24, and 66% did not initiate 2L therapy until Week 156. Median (95% CI) duration of 1L therapy was 48 (45-52) months (Figure). Median (95% CI) survival from the start of 1L therapy was 79 (71-NR) months. The estimated survival rate (95% CI) was 76% (73-79) at Week 156. Median (95% CI) overall survival was 120 (93-147) months. Median (Q1-Q3) total number of days hospitalized after the index date was 2 (0-19), and median (Q1, Q3) total number of days in the intensive care unit after the index date was 0 (0, 0). Analyses will be updated for presentation. Conclusions : In patients with MF, RUX was the most commonly used agent in all lines of therapy. The greatest reduction in duration of MF treatment occurred from 1L to 2L. Most patients remained on 1L therapy through Week 24 and did not initiate 2L therapy until Week 156. Median survival time from start of 1L therapy to death was 79 months (approximately 6 years). There was a high degree of advanced bone marrow fibrosis as well as transfusion dependence among this real-world patient population. Together, these results highlight the importance of optimizing 1L therapy.

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)0,006
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 enseignants0,011
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,022

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,006
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0040,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0010,002
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0040,001

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 Opus0,083
Tête enseignante GPT0,360
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · 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

Citations1
Publié2023
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207