Clinical outcomes of high-risk patients with polycythemia vera after suboptimal response to first-line therapy who switched to ruxolitinib versus nonswitchers: results from the PV-Switch study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Cytoreductive therapies have been the standard treatment for patients with high-risk polycythemia vera (PV) for decades. However, approximately 24% of patients treated with hydroxyurea will eventually develop resistance or intolerance to hydroxyurea and need second-line (2L) therapy. Objective: This study compared clinical outcomes of patients with high-risk PV who switched to ruxolitinib as 2L therapy (switchers) versus those who continued first-line (1L) therapy (nonswitchers) after suboptimal response. Design: This was a retrospective, multicenter, noninterventional study. Methods: The primary outcome was event-free survival (EFS), defined as the time between the index date and the earliest event of thrombosis, major bleeding, disease progression, or death. Key secondary outcomes included overall survival (OS), time to and rate of disease progression, rate of thrombosis, and change in spleen size. Results: Overall, 225 patients were included (switchers: 69; nonswitchers: 156). At baseline, >50% of switchers had a prior history of thrombosis ( p = 0.006) and PV-related symptoms ( p = 0.037) versus nonswitchers. Switchers had a numerically greater reduction in spleen size at 3 years than nonswitchers (−14.4% vs +15.9%; p = 0.107). Compared with nonswitchers, switchers were more likely to experience persistence or presence of new PV-related symptoms as suboptimal response before switching to ruxolitinib ( p < 0.001). A greater proportion of nonswitchers required ⩾3 phlebotomies to maintain hematocrit <45% within 1 year ( p < 0.001). No significant differences were observed between switchers and nonswitchers in terms of EFS, OS, time to disease progression, and rate of thrombosis. However, switchers had a significantly higher rate of disease progression to myelofibrosis than nonswitchers ( p = 0.016). Conclusion: These data demonstrate the heterogeneity in patient characteristics and type of suboptimal responses between switchers and nonswitchers. The results suggest that patients who switched to ruxolitinib had more severe disease or rapid disease progression and that ruxolitinib may provide some clinical benefit in terms of spleen size reduction and hematocrit control.
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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".