Long-term utilization and benefit of luspatercept in patients (pts) with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (LR-MDS) from the MEDALIST trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
7056 Background: Luspatercept was previously shown to improve anemia in the phase 3 MEDALIST trial of pts with LR-MDS ineligible, intolerant, or refractory to erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). Here, we report the long-term clinical value of luspatercept treatment (Tx) in pts from the MEDALIST study including dosing and rates of progression to acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and high-risk MDS (HR-MDS). Methods: Eligible pts were ≥ 18 y of age, had LR-MDS requiring regular red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, and were ineligible/intolerant or refractory to ESAs. Pts were randomized 2:1 to subcutaneous luspatercept or placebo every 3 wk for 24 wk. The primary endpoint was RBC transfusion independence (RBC-TI) ≥ 8 wk during wk 1–24. MEDALIST pts were eligible for enrollment into the long-term follow-up study. Median duration of Tx and cumulative duration of response were determined by Kaplan–Meier (KM) analysis. Total person-years for pts at risk of HR-MDS/AML progression was calculated from LR-MDS diagnosis to HR-MDS/AML diagnosis, or to last HR-MDS/AML follow-up date for pts who did not progress. Results: As of January 15, 2021, the median duration of Tx was 11.70 (95% CI, 8.97–16.33) mo for luspatercept pts and 5.52 (95% CI, 5.52–5.59) mo for placebo pts. Of those enrolled in MEDALIST, 106/153 (69.3%) pts receiving luspatercept and 64/76 (84.2%) receiving placebo escalated to the maximum dose of 1.75 mg/kg. During the entire Tx phase, RBC-TI ≥ 8 wk was observed in 74/153 (48.4%) and 12/76 (15.8%) pts in the luspatercept and placebo arms, respectively, with a median cumulative duration of response of 80.7 (95% CI, 53.71–154.14) wk and 21.0 (95% CI, 10.86–NE) wk, respectively. During the entire Tx period, RBC-TI ≥ 16 wk was observed in 48/153 (31.4%) and 6/76 (7.9%) pts in the luspatercept and placebo arms, respectively (Table). Among pts randomized to luspatercept, 13/153 (8.5%) progressed to HR-MDS/AML during the entire Tx period, compared with 5/76 (6.6%) for placebo. The total person-years for pts randomized to luspatercept at risk of progressing to HR-MDS/AML was 401.7 y vs 190.9 y for placebo. Conclusions: Pts receiving luspatercept had an extended period of clinical benefit and > 50% of pts continued to receive luspatercept for > 1 y, the majority of whom underwent dose escalations to achieve an optimal response. Pts experienced durable responses with luspatercept, with a median cumulative duration of RBC-TI response of approximately 20 mo. Pts receiving luspatercept also appeared to have a longer time to HR-MDS/AML progression than those receiving placebo.[Table: see text]
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".