MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy of pacritinib in patients with myelofibrosis who have both thrombocytopenia and anemia.

2024· article· en· W4400109015 on OpenAlexaff
Pankit Vachhani, Vikas Gupta, Francesca Palandri, Purvi Suthar, Sarah Buckley, Karisse Roman‐Torres, Prithviraj Bose

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer CentreUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyelofibrosisAnemiaRuxolitinibInternal medicinePopulationRandomized controlled trialGastroenterologySurgeryBone marrow

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

6578 Background: Both thrombocytopenia and anemia pose treatment challenges in myelofibrosis (MF). When these two cytopenias co-occur (“bicytopenia”), management becomes particularly challenging, and appropriate treatment selection is critical to optimize efficacy while minimizing myelosuppressive side effects. Pacritinib (PAC) is a JAK1-sparing inhibitor of JAK2/IRAK1/ACVR1 that has been studied at full dose in patients (pts) with MF regardless of baseline thrombocytopenia or anemia. Here, we present data on spleen and symptom benefit in PAC-treated pts with moderate or severe bicytopenia. Methods: Pts treated with PAC 200 mg twice daily or best available therapy (BAT) on PERSIST-2 with bicytopenia at baseline (platelet count <100 x109/L and hemoglobin <10 g/dL) were included. This group was retrospectively analyzed for spleen volume reduction (SVR) ≥35%, total symptom score (TSS; version 2.0, excluding tiredness) reduction of ≥50%, Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC), median dose intensity, and transfusion independence response (TI-R). TI-R was assessed among pts who required red blood cell (RBC) transfusion at baseline (within 90 days) and defined as the absence of RBC transfusions over any 12-week period through 24 weeks (Gale criteria). Baseline characteristics are presented in the safety population (pts randomized ≥12 weeks prior to study end and treated); efficacy is presented in the intention-to-treat efficacy population (pts randomized ≥22 weeks prior to end of study). Statistical testing was performed using Fishers Exact Test for efficacy endpoints. Results: Among 46 pts on PAC and 47 on BAT, baseline characteristics were generally similar between groups respectively: median age (65 vs 68 years), platelet count (46 vs 46 x109/L), and hemoglobin (8.4 vs 8.6 g/dL). A lower percentage of pts in PAC than BAT were receiving RBC transfusions (59% vs. 77%) and had prior JAK inhibitor exposure (43% vs 55%). Most pts treated with PAC were able to maintain full doses over time, with median actual dose intensity for PAC being 400 mg/day. A total of 45% of pts in the BAT group received ruxolitinib (median last total daily dose: 10 mg). In the PAC group, 20% (8/40) had SVR ≥35% compared to 0% (0/38) in the BAT group ( P=0.0054). Similarly, 32.5% of the pts in the PAC group had ≥50% reduction of TSS compared to 10.5% of pts in the BAT group ( P=0.0274). PGIC response (patient-reported symptoms “very much” or “much” improved) at week 24 was greater in the PAC group (30%) compared to BAT (13.2%; P=NS). Among the 27 pts on PAC and 36 on BAT who received RBC transfusions at baseline, 26% of pts on PAC and 8% of pts on BAT achieved TI-R ( P=0.0838). Conclusions: PAC at full dose demonstrates efficacy for spleen, symptoms, and transfusion response in pts with MF and both thrombocytopenia and anemia. These findings suggest PAC may be an effective option to address the unmet need for pts with MF and bicytopenias. Clinical trial information: NCT02055781 .

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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.423
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicMyeloproliferative Neoplasms: Diagnosis and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207