Safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in an open-label, multicenter, single-arm phase 3b expanded-access study in patients with myelofibrosis: a snapshot of 1144 patients in the JUMP trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
JUMP is a phase 3b expanded-access trial for patients without access to ruxolitinib outside of a clinical study; it is the largest clinical trial to date in patients with myelofibrosis who have been treated with ruxolitinib. Here, we present safety and efficacy findings from an analysis of 1144 patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis, as well as a separate analysis of 163 patients with intermediate-1-risk myelofibrosis - a population of patients not included in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with ruxolitinib's mechanism of action, the most common hematologic adverse events were anemia and thrombocytopenia, but these led to treatment discontinuation in only a few cases. The most common non-hematologic adverse events were primarily grade 1/2 and included diarrhea, pyrexia, fatigue, and asthenia. The rates of infections were low and primarily grade 1/2, and no new or unexpected infections were observed. The majority of patients achieved a ≥50% reduction from baseline in palpable spleen length. Improvements in symptoms were rapid, with approximately half of all patients experiencing clinically significant improvements, as assessed by various quality-of-life questionnaires. The safety and efficacy profile in intermediate-1-risk patients was consistent with that in the overall JUMP population and with that previously reported in intermediate-2- and high-risk patients. Overall, ruxolitinib provided clinically meaningful reductions in spleen length and symptoms in patients with myelofibrosis, including those with intermediate-1-risk disease, with a safety and efficacy profile consistent with that observed in the phase 3 COMFORT studies. This trial was registered as NCT01493414 at ClinicalTrials.gov.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".