Real-world treatment patterns and health outcomes for patients with myelofibrosis treated with fedratinib
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: Assess real-world fedratinib (FEDR) treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in patients with primary or secondary myelofibrosis following discontinuation of ruxolitinib (RUX). PATIENTS & METHODS: This study was a retrospective, noninterventional medical record review of patients in Canada, Germany, and the United Kingdom (UK). A total of 70 physicians (primarily hematologist-oncologists [78.6%]) provided data for 196 eligible patients. RESULTS: Patients were mostly male (62.8%) with primary myelofibrosis (76.5%) and initiated FEDR at a mean age of 67.7 years. Median treatment duration was 11.5 months (median follow-up, 13.8 months), and nearly half (49.5%) of patients initiated FEDR at the label-indicated dose of 400 mg daily. Six months post-initiation, 77.7% and 66.8% of patients experienced symptom and spleen response, respectively. Kaplan-Meier estimates of median progression-free and overall survival from initiation were 23.8 months (95% CI, 21.1-27.6) and 29.8 months (95% CI, 23.9-NE), respectively. CONCLUSION: These findings demonstrate real-world FEDR effectiveness among patients with myelofibrosis who discontinued RUX.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".