MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387969051 · doi:10.1097/hs9.0000000000000963

Momelotinib in Myelofibrosis Patients With Thrombocytopenia: Post Hoc Analysis From Three Randomized Phase 3 Trials

2023· article· en· W4387969051 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian, Alessandro M. Vannucchi, Aaron T. Gerds, Vikas Gupta, Srđan Verstovšek, Miklós Egyed, Uwe Platzbecker, Jiřı́ Mayer, Sebastian Grosicki, Árpád Illés, T Woźny, Stephen T. Oh, Donal P. McLornan, Ilya Kirgner, Sung‐Soo Yoon, Claire Harrison, Barbara Klencke, Mei Huang, Jun Kawashima, Ruben A. Mesa

Bibliographic record

VenueHemaSphere · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Cancer InstituteGenentechItalfarmacoGalectoSierra OncologyCTI BiopharmaIncyteJazz PharmaceuticalsYuhanGilead SciencesCelgeneBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaAmgenPfizerConstellation Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsRuxolitinibMyelofibrosisMedicinePost-hoc analysisInternal medicinePopulationAnemiaGastroenterologyBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The oral activin A receptor type I, Janus kinase 1 (JAK1), and JAK2 inhibitor momelotinib demonstrated symptom, spleen, and anemia benefits in intermediate- and high-risk myelofibrosis (MF). Post hoc analyses herein evaluated the efficacy and safety of momelotinib in patients with MF and thrombocytopenia (platelet counts <100 × 10 9 /L) from randomized phase 3 studies: MOMENTUM (momelotinib versus danazol; JAK inhibitor experienced); SIMPLIFY-1 (momelotinib versus ruxolitinib; JAK inhibitor naïve); and SIMPLIFY-2 (momelotinib versus best available therapy; JAK inhibitor experienced); these studies were not statistically powered to assess differences in thrombocytopenic subgroups, and these analyses are descriptive. The treatment effect of momelotinib versus ruxolitinib on week 24 response rates (spleen volume reduction ≥35%/Total Symptom Score reduction ≥50%/transfusion independence) was numerically comparable or better in thrombocytopenic patients versus the overall JAK inhibitor naive population; rates were preserved with momelotinib in thrombocytopenic patients but attenuated with ruxolitinib (momelotinib: 27%/28%/67% overall versus 39%/35%/61% in thrombocytopenic group; ruxolitinib: 29%/42%/49% overall versus 0%/22%/39% in thrombocytopenic group, respectively). In contrast to ruxolitinib, momelotinib maintained high dose intensity throughout the treatment. In the JAK inhibitor experienced population, thrombocytopenic patients had the following: (1) numerically higher symptom and transfusion independence response rates with momelotinib than in control arms; and (2) preserved spleen, symptom, and transfusion independence response rates with momelotinib relative to the overall study populations. The safety profile of momelotinib in thrombocytopenic patients was also consistent with the overall study population. In summary, momelotinib represents a safe and effective treatment option for patients with MF and moderate-to-severe thrombocytopenia.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.316
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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