MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Longer-term RBC transfusion reduction in the phase III MEDALIST study of luspatercept in patients (pts) with lower-risk MDS with ring sideroblasts (RS).

2020· article· en· W3029365679 on OpenAlexaff
Rami S. Komrokji, Mikkael A. Sekeres, Amer M. Zeidan, Pierre Fenaux, Alan F. List, Amy E. DeZern, Peter L. Greenberg, Michael R. Savona, Joseph G. Jurcic, Amit Verma, Ghulam J. Mufti, Rena Buckstein, Valeria Santini, Abderrahmane Laadem, Rodrigo Ito, Jennie Zhang, Chrystal U. Louis, Peter G. Linde, Guillermo Garcia‐Manero

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnemiaRandomizationPlaceboSurgeryRefractory (planetary science)Internal medicineMyelodysplastic syndromesRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologyBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

7518 Background: MEDALIST (NCT02631070) is a randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled, phase 3 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of luspatercept, a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent, in pts with anemia due to lower-risk MDS (LR-MDS) with RS (Fenaux & Platzbecker et al. NEJM. 2020;382:140-51). Methods: Pts were aged ≥ 18 years; had IPSS-R-defined Very low-, Low-, or Intermediate-risk MDS with RS; were refractory, intolerant, or unlikely to respond to ESAs; and required RBC transfusions (≥ 2 units/8 weeks in the 16 weeks prior to randomization). 229 pts were randomized 2:1 to luspatercept (1.0 mg/kg, titration to 1.75 mg/kg) or PBO subcutaneously every 3 weeks. This analysis evaluates long-term transfusion burden reduction with luspatercept in all pts in the MEDALIST trial. Results: As of July 1, 2019, 77/153 (50.3%) and 11/76 (14.5%) pts in the luspatercept and PBO arms, respectively, achieved ≥ 50% RBC transfusion burden reduction for ≥ 24 weeks ( P < 0.0001). The median longest single response episode was 131.6 weeks with luspatercept, and not estimable with PBO due to pts stopping treatment. In Weeks 9–24, mean change from baseline in RBC units transfused was −3.0 (95% CI −3.9, −2.1) vs +0.4 (95% CI −0.6, 1.4) in the luspatercept vs PBO arms. In Weeks 33–48, mean change in RBC units transfused in the luspatercept arm was −4.9 (95% CI −5.9, −3.9). In Weeks 1–24, mean number of transfusion visits was 5.9 vs 9.5 in the luspatercept vs PBO arms. Risk of recurrent transfusion visits in Weeks 1–24 for luspatercept vs PBO was 0.699 (95% CI 0.597, 0.819; P < 0.0001). Mean number (least squares [LS] mean) of RBC units transfused/48 weeks during Weeks 1–48 was 22.89 (23.28) vs 35.98 (35.20) in luspatercept vs PBO arms (LS mean difference −11.92 [95% CI −15.55, −8.28]; P < 0.0001). The mean number (LS mean) of RBC transfusion events over 48 weeks was 12.95 (13.14) vs 19.54 (19.15) in the luspatercept vs PBO arms (LS mean difference −6.00 [95% CI −8.16, −3.85]; P < 0.0001). LS mean change from baseline in serum ferritin was −2.7 µg/L vs +226.5 µg/L in luspatercept vs PBO (LS mean difference −229.1 µg/L; P = 0.0024) in Weeks 9–24; and −72.0 µg/L vs +247.4 µg/L in Weeks 33–48 (LS mean difference −319.5 µg/L; P = 0.0294). In Weeks 1–24, 38/127 (29.9%) vs 5/65 (7.7%) pts ( P = 0.0005) achieved major HI-E response per IWG 2018 criteria in luspatercept vs PBO arms, respectively. Conclusions: Luspatercept demonstrated clinical efficacy in pts with LR-MDS with RS and was associated with significant reductions in RBC transfusions (≥ 50%) and serum ferritin. Clinical trial information: NCT02631070 .

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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.337 · 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207