Efficacy and safety of momelotinib in Janus kinase inhibitor-experienced Asian patients with myelofibrosis and anemia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: This post hoc analysis investigated the efficacy and safety of momelotinib in the Asian subpopulation of MOMENTUM (NCT04173494). METHODS: Patients were randomized 2:1 to momelotinib 200 mg once daily (QD) plus danazol placebo (momelotinib group) or danazol 600 mg QD plus momelotinib placebo (danazol group) for 24 weeks (W), after which they could receive open-label momelotinib or danazol. PRIMARY ENDPOINT: W24 total symptom score (TSS) response rate (≥ 50% reduction from baseline). W24 key secondary endpoints: transfusion independence rate; mean TSS change from baseline; splenic response rate; rate of zero transfusions. RESULTS: Seventeen Asian patients with myelofibrosis were included (momelotinib: n = 11; danazol: n = 6). TSS response rate at W24 was 36.4% with momelotinib and 0% with danazol. Secondary endpoints favored momelotinib and were consistent with the intention-to-treat population. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 36.4 and 66.7% of the momelotinib and danazol groups, respectively, including one grade ≥ 3 anemia in the momelotinib group. Treatment interruption and/or dose reduction occurred in 18.2 and 16.7% of the momelotinib and danazol groups, respectively. Two danazol-treated patients discontinued study treatment. CONCLUSION: In the Asian subpopulation of MOMENTUM, momelotinib improved myelofibrosis-associated symptoms, anemia measures, and spleen response, with generally favorable safety versus danazol.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".