MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389235115 · doi:10.1182/blood-2023-174089

Efficacy and Safety of Luspatercept in Patients Enrolled in the BELIEVE Trial: Data from the Phase 3b Long-Term Rollover Study

2023· article· en· W4389235115 on OpenAlexaff
Maria Domenica Cappellini, Alì Taher, Vip Viprakasit, Pencho Georgiev, Kevin H.M. Kuo, Natalia Holot, Valérie Vilmont, Loyse Felber Medlin, Wen‐Ling Kuo, Yinzhi Lai, Luciana Moro Bueno, Sujit Sheth

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHemoglobinopathies and Related Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineAnemiaSurgeryRandomized controlled trialIntention-to-treat analysisInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Ineffective erythropoiesis and anemia are pathognomonic features of β-thalassemia, leading to red blood cell (RBC) transfusion dependence in patients with more severe genotypes and consequently increased morbidity and mortality. The phase 3 BELIEVE study showed that luspatercept reduces transfusion burden in transfusion-dependent patients with a manageable safety profile (Cappellini MD, et al. HemaSphere 2022;6[S3]:171-172; Viprakasit V, et al. HemaSphere 2022;6[S3]:2664-2665). Patients who continued to benefit from luspatercept at completion of the BELIEVE study or who needed to complete post-treatment follow-up could roll over to the phase 3b long-term follow-up study (LTFU; NCT04064060) to continue receiving treatment or complete post-treatment follow-up, respectively. Patients receiving luspatercept were monitored for continued efficacy and safety. Methods: The aim of this analysis was to evaluate long-term safety and efficacy of luspatercept in patients who rolled over to the LTFU study. This analysis included patients randomized to luspatercept during BELIEVE (luspatercept group) and those randomized to placebo who crossed over to receive luspatercept after unblinding (crossover group). Response was defined as ≥ 33% reduction from baseline in RBC transfusion burden during any 12-week interval over the entire treatment period of the combined studies. The data cutoff was Jan 2, 2023. Results: At the closure of the BELIEVE trial, 127/224 (56.7%) patients from the luspatercept group and 67/92 (72.8%) patients from the crossover group had transitioned to the LTFU study with the intention to continue luspatercept. At data cutoff, treatment was ongoing for 138 patients, 90 in the luspatercept group and 48 in the crossover group. Median (range) total treatment duration over the combined studies was 229.1 (1.7-336.1) weeks for the luspatercept group and 221.2 (6.1-230.7) weeks for the crossover group; 98 patients had completed 288 weeks (> 5 years) of treatment at data cutoff, all of whom had been randomized to luspatercept. In the luspatercept group, 180/224 (80.4%) patients had achieved response, continuing the trend showing an increasing proportion of responders with longer duration of treatment observed at previous data cutoffs (Figure A). Response in the crossover group was similar with 71/92 (77.2%) responders. Patients in the luspatercept and crossover groups had median (range) reductions in transfusion burden of −17.75% (−100.0 to 33.3) and −19.05% (−100.0 to 20.8), respectively, from baseline to week 145-192, equating to mean reductions of 6.78 RBC units (SD 7.27; n = 120) and 6.85 RBC units (SD 6.78; n = 50), respectively. Liver iron concentration in the luspatercept group was reduced with long-term treatment at each timepoint compared with the baseline (mean decrease of 2.80 mg/g dry weight [dw] at week 144 from median 8.97 [range, 1.1-31.9] at baseline [n = 24]; mean decrease of 0.45 mg/g dw at week 192 from median 7.75 [1.4-35.5] at baseline [n = 27]; mean decrease of 1.48 mg/g dw at week 240 from median 5.65 [1.0-42.0] at baseline [n = 20]). Mean changes from baseline in overall serum ferritin levels (last 24-week level for each patient prior to their efficacy cutoff) were −376.27 μg/L for luspatercept and +43.09 μg/L for crossover. In the combined studies up to data cutoff, 59.4% of luspatercept patients and 47.8% of crossover patients discontinued treatment. The most frequent reason for treatment discontinuation was the patient's personal decision to withdraw (luspatercept: 23.7% in BELIEVE and 33.5% in the combined studies; crossover: 14.1% in BELIEVE and 28.3% in the combined). Discontinuation due to an adverse event (AE) in the combined studies was similar to experience from BELIEVE (luspatercept: 10.3% BELIEVE and 12.5% combined; crossover: 4.3% BELIEVE and 7.6% combined). One patient (0.4%) discontinued luspatercept and transitioned to a commercially available treatment. The frequency of treatment-emergent AEs in the combined studies was also consistent with previous experience from the BELIEVE trial (Figure B). Summary: These long-term data from the LTFU study show that erythroid responses and safety results in both the luspatercept and crossover groups were consistent with previous clinical experience from the BELIEVE trial. Patients receiving long-term luspatercept treatment experience durable clinical benefit with no new safety concerns.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.284 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHemoglobinopathies and Related DisordersFrench-language works237,207