MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Improvement in Weight and Total Cholesterol and Their Association with Survival in Ruxolitinib-Treated Patients with Myelofibrosis From COMFORT-I

2012· article· en· W2562579323 on OpenAlexaff
Ruben A. Mesa, Srđan Verstovšek, Vikas Gupta, John Mascarenhas, Ehab Atallah, William Sun, Victor Sandor, Jason Gotlib

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuxolitinibMyelofibrosisMedicineInternal medicinePlaceboGastroenterologyWeight lossBody mass indexCachexiaHypocholesterolemiaAnemiaCholesterolSurgeryObesityCancerBone marrowPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 1733 Background: Patients with myelofibrosis (MF) suffer from cytopenias, debilitating symptoms, and splenomegaly, all of which may contribute to shortened life expectancy. Cachexia is a common manifestation of MF. Its causes are multifactorial and include elevated inflammatory cytokines and mechanical effects of splenomegaly. It is a predictor of poor survival in patients with MF. Cachexia manifests as weight loss with low body-mass index (BMI; <20–21 kg/m2) (Strasser F. Sixth Research Congress of the European Association of Palliative Care; Wagner PD. Eur Respir J. 2008;31:492–501) and with metabolic indicators of poor nutritional status including hypocholesterolemia (total cholesterol <150 mg/dL or <3.89 mmol/L), which has been linked to poor prognosis in MF (Mesa et al. Blood 2007;110:abstract 2548). In the phase III, placebo-controlled, COMFORT-I study, ruxolitinib treatment significantly reduced spleen volume, improved MF-related symptoms, and exhibited a survival advantage compared with placebo in patients with MF. In this post hoc analysis, we investigated the effects of ruxolitinib treatment on weight and total cholesterol and the association of these changes with survival in COMFORT-I. Methods: Eligible patients in COMFORT-I were randomized to receive placebo (n=154) or ruxolitinib (n=155) at starting doses of 15 and 20 mg PO BID depending on baseline platelet count. Body weight was measured at baseline, and weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, and 24 and then every 12 weeks thereafter. Total serum cholesterol was measured at baseline and weeks 4, 12, 24, and then every 24 weeks thereafter. All patients receiving PBO completed crossover or discontinued within 3 months of the primary data analysis (when all patients completed 24 weeks and when half the patients remaining on study completed 36 weeks of treatment); thus, data for these patients were available for up to week 36 for weight and week 24 for total cholesterol. Kaplan-Meier analyses of overall survival were conducted in patients randomized to ruxolitinib stratified into 2 groups based on the median values separately for maximum weight gain and for maximum increase in total cholesterol during randomized treatment. Results: At baseline, mean body weight was similar between the treatment groups (72 kg, both) and mean total cholesterol was low (<150 mg/dL) in both treatment groups (ruxolitinib: 118 mg/dL; placebo: 115 mg/dL). The proportion of patients with BMI <22 were similar between the treatment groups (ruxolitinib: 23%; placebo: 28%) as was the proportion with total cholesterol <150 mg/dL (82%, both). Patients randomized to ruxolitinib experienced a gradual increase in body weight that stabilized by week 36 of treatment whereas patients receiving placebo experienced decreases in body weight over time (Figure 1). Similarly, total cholesterol increased in patients randomized to ruxolitinib and decreased in patients receiving placebo (Figure 2). Although total cholesterol increased over time in ruxolitinib-treated patients, increases did not exceed the upper limit of normal (199 mg/dL or 5.15 mmol/L). Nearly all patients randomized to ruxolitinib experienced weight gain (96% of patients) or an increase in total cholesterol (97% of patients). In patients randomized to ruxolitinib, weight gain above the median was associated with prolonged survival relative to lesser degrees of weight gain (HR=0.40; 95% CI: 0.18, 0.90; P=0.022; Figure 3). Similarly, increase in total cholesterol above the median was also associated with prolonged survival relative to a lesser degree of total cholesterol increase (HR=0.46; 95% CI: 0.21, 1.01; P=0.048; Figure 4). Meaningful comparisons with the placebo group based on the same stratification criteria could not be conducted as the majority of such patients experienced weight loss and decreases in total cholesterol while on the study; however, overall survival favored both ruxolitinib groups relative to all patients randomized to placebo even for ruxolitinib-treated patients with lower than median levels of weight gain or increase in total cholesterol. Conclusions: Ruxolitinib therapy promotes weight gain and improves total cholesterol in MF patients. These results suggest that the survival advantage exhibited by ruxolitinib over placebo in MF patients may be partly explained by reversal of the catabolic state and cachexia. Disclosures: Mesa: Incyte: Research Funding; Lilly: Research Funding; Sanofi: Research Funding; NS Pharma: Research Funding; YM Bioscience: Research Funding. Verstovsek:Incyte Corporation: Research Funding. Gupta:Incyte: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; YM Biosciences: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Sanofi#x2610;#x0025; Aventis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Mascarenhas:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Novartis: Clinical Trial Support, Clinical Trial Support Other. Atallah:Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Sun:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Sandor:Incyte Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Gotlib:Incyte Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Support for travel to meeting for the study or other purposes from Incyte Other.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.191 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations25
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207