MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2979748361 · doi:10.1182/blood.v126.23.825.825

Phase 1b/2 Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Sonidegib (LDE225) in Combination with Ruxolitinib (INC424) in Patients with Myelofibrosis

2015· article· en· W2979748361 on OpenAlexaff
Vikas Gupta, Claire Harrison, Hans Carl Hasselbalch, Lisa Pieri, Steffen Koschmieder, Francisco Cervantes, Weichao Bao, Stacey Kalambakas, Edric Atienza, Prashanth Gopalakrishna, Florian H. Heidel

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRuxolitinibMedicineMyelofibrosisInternal medicinePhases of clinical researchJanus kinase inhibitorOncologyGastroenterologySurgeryBone marrowToxicityJanus kinase

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor, has been approved for the treatment of disease-related splenomegaly or symptoms in adults with primary myelofibrosis (MF), post-polycythemia vera (PPV) MF, and post-essential thrombocythemia (PET) MF. In a murine model of MF, ruxolitinib in combination with the hedgehog pathway inhibitor (HPI) sonidegib, improved splenomegaly and bone marrow (BM) fibrosis more than ruxolitinib monotherapy (Bhagwat, ASH 2013). Building on these data, ruxolitinib and sonidegib combination therapy is being assessed in a phase 1b/2 study in patients (pts) with MF (NCT01787552). Findings from the phase 1b portion of this study determined the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) to be sonidegib 400 mg once daily and ruxolitinib 20 mg twice daily (Gupta, ASH 2014). Combination treatment was generally well tolerated; the maximum tolerated dose was not reached, and the only observed dose-limiting toxicity was creatine kinase (CK) elevation. In this report, safety and efficacy data from the analysis performed 24 weeks after the last pt enrollment (data cutoff, 08 May 2015) are presented for pts treated at the RP2D. Methods: Eligible pts includedadults with primary or secondary (PPV or PET) intermediate (Int)- or high-risk MF with palpable splenomegaly who were not previously treated with a JAK inhibitor or HPI. The primary objective was to assess the efficacy of co-administration of ruxolitinib and sonidegib determined by reduction in spleen volume per MRI/CT by central review at the end of weeks 24 and 48. Results: Overall, 27 pts with primary MF (n = 16; 59.3%), PET-MF (n = 7; 25.9%), and PPV-MF (n = 4; 14.8%) were treated at the RP2D (median exposure, 28.6 weeks). The median age was 69 years (range, 44 to 83 years), 70.4% of pts were male, and 85.2% were JAK2 V617F positive. According to the International Prognosis Scoring System, 1 pt (3.7%) was low risk, 4 pts (14.8%) were Int-1, 4 pts (14.8%) were Int-2, and 18 pts (66.7%) were high risk. At data cutoff, 20 pts (74.1%) remained on treatment; 5 pts discontinued treatment due to an adverse event (AE), and 1 pt each due to pt decision and death (multi-organ failure unrelated to study treatment occurring 2 days after discontinuation). Overall, the most common AEs regardless of causality (all grade; grade 3/4; Table) were anemia (52%; 33%) and muscle spasms (48%; 4%). AEs requiring dose adjustment or interruption were experienced by 17 pts (63%), with the most common being increased CK (19% [n = 5]) and myalgia (19% [n = 5]). The mean hemoglobin level at baseline (BL) was ≈ 100 g/L and it remained relatively stable throughout treatment. Mean platelet count decreased from BL levels of ≈ 300 × 109/L to ≈ 150 × 109/L by week 4, and then remained relatively stable at ≈ 200 × 109/L. At the end of week 24, 12 pts (44.4%) had a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume as measured by MRI/CT and 15 pts (55.6%) achieved a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume at any time on treatment (Figure 1). A ≥ 50% reduction in palpable spleen length was achieved by 15 pts (55.6%) at the end of week 24; a best response of ≥ 50% reduction in spleen length at any time on treatment was achieved by 25 pts (92.6%), with 15 pts (55.6%) having a non-palpable spleen (Figure 2). The mean change in JAK2 V617F allele burden was -9.0% (range, -56.5% to 7.0%) from BL to the end of week 24. Investigator-assessed changes in BM fibrosis in pts with BL and post-BL values indicated that 2 pts had an improvement (from grade 3 to grade 2), 8 pts remained stable, and 3 pts had a worsening from BL by the end of week 24. Pharmacokinetics of the combination will be presented. Conclusions: The combination of ruxolitinib and sonidegib has activity in pts with MF and may provide improved benefit over ruxolitinib monotherapy. Combination treatment was generally well tolerated, with ≈ 74% of pts remaining on treatment at data cutoff. Table. Most Common Adverse Events Sonidegib 400 mg Once Daily + Ruxolitinib 20 mg Twice Daily(n = 27) AEs of any cause in ≥ 10% of pts, n (%) All Grade 3/4 Anemia 14 (52) 9 (33) Muscle spasms 13 (48) 1 (4) Increased CK 10 (37) 5 (19) Myalgia 8 (30) 2 (7) Dysgeusia 8 (30) - Thrombocytopenia 7 (26) 3 (11) Diarrhea 7 (26) 1 (4) Fatigue 7 (26) 0 Pyrexia 6 (22) 1 (4) Alopecia 6 (22) - Constipation 5 (19) 0 Nausea 5 (19) 0 Abdominal pain 4 (15) 0 Dizziness 4 (15) 0 Headache 4 (15) 0 Decreased platelet count 3 (11) 1 (4) Asthenia 3 (11) 0 Cough 3 (11) 0 Decreased weight 3 (11) 0 Dry mouth 3 (11) 0 Dyspnea 3 (11) 0 Extremity pain 3 (11) 0 Increased creatinine 3 (11) 0 Disclosures Gupta: Incyte: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Ruxolitinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for treatment of patients with intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis, including primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. Sonidegib is approved for the treatment of locally advanced basal cell carcinoma. Harrison:Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; CTI Biopharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Honoraria; Shire: Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Hasselbalch:Novartis: Research Funding. Koschmieder:Novartis Foundation: Research Funding; Baxalta/CTI: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences ; Janssen Cilag: Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences ; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel reimbursement for scientific conferences , Research Funding. Cervantes:Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; CTI-Baxter: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi-Aventis: Consultancy. Bao:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Kalambakas:Novartis: Employment, Equity Ownership. Atienza:Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Employment. Gopalakrishna:Novartis Pharma AG: Employment. Heidel:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

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)0.002
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: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.248 · 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 designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations32
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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