Phase 2 study of subcutaneous omacetaxine mepesuccinate for chronic‐phase chronic myeloid leukemia patients resistant to or intolerant of tyrosine kinase inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Omacetaxine mepesuccinate (omacetaxine) is a first-in-class cephalotaxine with a unique mode of action, independent of BCR-ABL, that has shown promising activity in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML). This multicenter, noncomparative, open-label phase 2 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous omacetaxine in CML patients with resistance or intolerance to two or more tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs); results in patients in chronic phase are reported here. Patients received subcutaneous omacetaxine 1.25 mg/m² twice daily days 1-14 every 28 days until hematologic response (up to a maximum of six cycles), then days 1-7 every 28 days as maintenance. Primary endpoints were rates of hematologic response lasting >8 weeks and major cytogenetic response (MCyR). Forty-six patients were enrolled: all had received imatinib, 83% had received dasatinib, and 57% nilotinib. A median 4.5 cycles of omacetaxine were administered (range, 1-36). Hematologic response was achieved or maintained in 31 patients (67%); median response duration was 7.0 months. Ten patients (22%) achieved MCyR, including 2 (4%) complete cytogenetic responses. Median progression-free survival was 7.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 5.9-8.9 months], and overall survival was 30.1 months (95% CI, 20.3 months-not reached). Grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity included thrombocytopenia (54%), neutropenia (48%), and anemia (33%). Nonhematologic adverse events were predominantly grade 1/2 and included diarrhea (44%), nausea (30%), fatigue (24%), pyrexia (20%), headache (20%), and asthenia (20%). Subcutaneous omacetaxine may offer clinical benefit to patients with chronic-phase CML with resistance or intolerance to multiple TKI therapies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".