MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4405034490 · doi:10.1182/blood-2024-193193

Updated Results from the Phase 3 Manifest-2 Study of Pelabresib in Combination with Ruxolitinib for Janus Kinase Inhibitor-Naïve Patients with Myelofibrosis

2024· article· en· W4405034490 sur OpenAlexaff
John Mascarenhas, Sebastian Grosicki, Dominik Chraniuk, Elisabetta Abruzzese, Prithviraj Bose, Aaron T. Gerds, Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Francesca Palandri, Sung‐Eun Lee, Vikas Gupta, Alessandro Lucchesi, Stephen T. Oh, Andrew Kuykendall, Andrea Patriarca, Alberto Álvarez‐Larrán, Ruben A. Mesa, Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian, Moshe Talpaz, Morgan Harris, Sarah-Katharina Kays, Qing Li, Barbara Brown, Anna-Maria Jegg, Claire Harrison, Raajit K. Rampal

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2024
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésRuxolitinibMyelofibrosisJanus kinase inhibitorMedicineInternal medicineJanus kinase 2JanusJanus kinasePhases of clinical researchJanus kinase 1Phase (matter)OncologyClinical trialChemistryBone marrowComputer scienceReceptor

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background Myelofibrosis (MF) is characterized by splenomegaly, MF-associated symptoms, cytopenias (eg, anemia), and impairment of the bone marrow (BM) microenvironment (including fibrosis). Pelabresib (CPI-0610; PELA) is an investigational, oral, small molecule drug that inhibits BET proteins and subsequent BET-mediated gene expression involved in MF pathogenesis. The Phase 3 MANIFEST-2 study (NCT04603495) met its primary endpoint, showing a statistically significant higher proportion of patients (pts) with ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SVR35) from baseline (BL) at Week (Wk) 24 with PELA+ruxolitinib (RUX) vs placebo (PBO)+RUX (p<0.001) in Janus kinase inhibitor-naïve pts with MF. PELA+RUX also showed a trend toward improved total symptom score (TSS) from BL at Wk 24, as well as improvements in multiple measures of anemia (eg, hemoglobin [Hb] response) and in the BM microenvironment, vs PBO+RUX (Rampal R, et al. Presented at ASH 2023 [Oral 628]). Aim To present follow-up efficacy and safety outcomes at Wk 48 from the Phase 3 MANIFEST-2 study. Methods Eligible pts had a DIPSS ≥intermediate-1 risk, platelet count ≥100 × 109/L, spleen volume ≥450 cm3, ≥2 symptoms with an average score ≥3 or TSS ≥10 by MF Symptom Assessment Form v4.0, peripheral blast count <5%, and ECOG PS ≤2. Pts were randomized 1:1. PELA or PBO was administered once daily for 14 consecutive days of 21-day cycles in combination with RUX, which was administered twice daily for 21-day cycles. Primary endpoint was SVR35 at Wk 24. Key secondary endpoints were absolute change in TSS and ≥50% reduction in TSS from BL (TSS50) at Wk 24. Other prespecified endpoints included SVR35 at Wk 48, absolute change in TSS and TSS50 at Wk 48, Hb response (≥1.5 g/dL mean increase from BL without transfusions in the prior 12 wks), BM fibrosis (BMF), and safety. Mutation profiles were assessed by next-generation sequencing. Informed consent was obtained from all pts. Results As of March 29, 2024, all pts assessed had been followed for ≥48 wks; 58.9% (126/214) and 62.0% (134/216) of pts continued on double-blind treatment in the PELA+RUX and PBO+RUX arms, respectively. Preliminary data are presented here; analyses are ongoing and data points are subject to change. At Wk 48, 56.5% (121/214) vs 37.5% (81/216) of pts had SVR35 responses in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms, showing sustained benefit beyond Wk 24. SVR35 responders at any time were 82.2% (176/214) vs 58.3% (126/216) in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arm; loss of SVR35 response was observed in 13.1% (23/176) vs 19.8% (25/126) of pts in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arm. At Wk 48, least squares mean (standard error) absolute change in TSS was −16.24 (1.133) vs −14.11 (1.085) in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms, with a greater difference in absolute TSS observed between treatment arms at Wk 24 and Wk 48 for pts with higher symptom burden at BL. TSS50 response at Wk 48 was 45.3% (97/214) vs 39.4% (85/216) with PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX. Dual SVR35 and TSS50 response was observed in 36.0% (77/214) vs 19.0% (41/216) of pts in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms at Wk 48. Hb response was observed in 12.6% (27/214; 95% confidence interval [CI], 8.17-17.07) vs 6.9% (15/216; 95% CI, 3.55-10.33) of pts in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms, with differences between arms in mean Hb levels maintained at Wk 48; in pts with anemia (Hb BL <10 g/dL), Hb response was observed in 17.9% (12/67; 95% CI, 8.73-27.09) vs 14.1% (10/71; 95% CI, 5.99-22.18) of pts. The trend of higher rate of BMF improvement of ≥1 grade in the PELA+RUX arm vs the PBO+RUX arm continued to be observed at Wk 48. Of 426 pts evaluated for safety, ≥1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE) was reported in 97.6% vs 96.7% of pts in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms; Grade ≥3 events were reported in 56.6% vs 62.1% of pts. Rates of the most common TEAEs (≥10%) at Wk 48 in the PELA+RUX vs PBO+RUX arms were similar to rates at Wk 24. Updated efficacy and safety results, including data on BMF, mutational profile, and leukemic transformation, will be presented. Conclusion At Wk 48, PELA+RUX continued to show improvements in spleen volume, TSS, multiple measures of anemia, and the BM microenvironment vs PBO+RUX, impacting the four hallmarks of MF. These data suggest that PELA+RUX could lead to more profound and sustained responses in pts with MF vs PBO+RUX.

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)0,006
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
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 enseignants0,008
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,031

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0060,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0020,002
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,002
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

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 Opus0,015
Tête enseignante GPT0,269
Écart entre enseignants0,255 · 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

Citations7
Publié2024
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentTravaux en français237 207