Cargando…

The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35–54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: McMullin, Mary Frances, Harrison, Claire N., Niederwieser, Dietger, Demuynck, Hilde, Jäkel, Nadja, Gopalakrishna, Prashanth, McQuitty, Mari, Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya, Recher, Christian, Theunissen, Koen, Gisslinger, Heinz, Kiladjian, Jean-Jacques, Al-Ali, Haifa-Kathrin
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4570722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26380150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40164-015-0021-2
_version_ 1782390252300664832
author McMullin, Mary Frances
Harrison, Claire N.
Niederwieser, Dietger
Demuynck, Hilde
Jäkel, Nadja
Gopalakrishna, Prashanth
McQuitty, Mari
Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya
Recher, Christian
Theunissen, Koen
Gisslinger, Heinz
Kiladjian, Jean-Jacques
Al-Ali, Haifa-Kathrin
author_facet McMullin, Mary Frances
Harrison, Claire N.
Niederwieser, Dietger
Demuynck, Hilde
Jäkel, Nadja
Gopalakrishna, Prashanth
McQuitty, Mari
Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya
Recher, Christian
Theunissen, Koen
Gisslinger, Heinz
Kiladjian, Jean-Jacques
Al-Ali, Haifa-Kathrin
author_sort McMullin, Mary Frances
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35–54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall survival benefit and improvements in splenomegaly and patient-reported outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with the ruxolitinib mechanism of action, anemia was a frequently reported adverse event. In clinical practice, anemia is sometimes managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of concomitant ruxolitinib and ESA administration in patients enrolled in COMFORT-II, an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy for treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily or best available therapy. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan. RESULTS: Thirteen of 146 ruxolitinib-treated patients had concomitant ESA administration (+ESA). The median exposure to ruxolitinib was 114 weeks in the +ESA group and 111 weeks in the overall ruxolitinib arm; the median ruxolitinib dose intensity was 33 mg/day for each group. Six weeks before the first ESA administration, 10 of the 13 patients had grade 3/4 hemoglobin abnormalities. These had improved to grade 2 in 7 of the 13 patients by 6 weeks after the first ESA administration. The rate of packed red blood cell transfusions per month within 12 weeks before and after first ESA administration remained the same in 1 patient, decreased in 2 patients, and increased in 3 patients; 7 patients remained transfusion independent. Reductions in splenomegaly were observed in 69 % of evaluable patients (9/13) following first ESA administration. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of an ESA with ruxolitinib was well tolerated and did not affect the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Further investigations evaluating the effects of ESAs to alleviate anemia in ruxolitinib-treated patients are warranted (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00934544; July 6, 2009).
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4570722
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-45707222015-09-16 The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis McMullin, Mary Frances Harrison, Claire N. Niederwieser, Dietger Demuynck, Hilde Jäkel, Nadja Gopalakrishna, Prashanth McQuitty, Mari Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya Recher, Christian Theunissen, Koen Gisslinger, Heinz Kiladjian, Jean-Jacques Al-Ali, Haifa-Kathrin Exp Hematol Oncol Research BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35–54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall survival benefit and improvements in splenomegaly and patient-reported outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with the ruxolitinib mechanism of action, anemia was a frequently reported adverse event. In clinical practice, anemia is sometimes managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of concomitant ruxolitinib and ESA administration in patients enrolled in COMFORT-II, an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy for treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily or best available therapy. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan. RESULTS: Thirteen of 146 ruxolitinib-treated patients had concomitant ESA administration (+ESA). The median exposure to ruxolitinib was 114 weeks in the +ESA group and 111 weeks in the overall ruxolitinib arm; the median ruxolitinib dose intensity was 33 mg/day for each group. Six weeks before the first ESA administration, 10 of the 13 patients had grade 3/4 hemoglobin abnormalities. These had improved to grade 2 in 7 of the 13 patients by 6 weeks after the first ESA administration. The rate of packed red blood cell transfusions per month within 12 weeks before and after first ESA administration remained the same in 1 patient, decreased in 2 patients, and increased in 3 patients; 7 patients remained transfusion independent. Reductions in splenomegaly were observed in 69 % of evaluable patients (9/13) following first ESA administration. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of an ESA with ruxolitinib was well tolerated and did not affect the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Further investigations evaluating the effects of ESAs to alleviate anemia in ruxolitinib-treated patients are warranted (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00934544; July 6, 2009). BioMed Central 2015-09-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4570722/ /pubmed/26380150 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40164-015-0021-2 Text en © McMullin et al. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
McMullin, Mary Frances
Harrison, Claire N.
Niederwieser, Dietger
Demuynck, Hilde
Jäkel, Nadja
Gopalakrishna, Prashanth
McQuitty, Mari
Stalbovskaya, Viktoriya
Recher, Christian
Theunissen, Koen
Gisslinger, Heinz
Kiladjian, Jean-Jacques
Al-Ali, Haifa-Kathrin
The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title_full The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title_fullStr The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title_full_unstemmed The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title_short The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
title_sort use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in comfort-ii: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4570722/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26380150
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40164-015-0021-2
work_keys_str_mv AT mcmullinmaryfrances theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT harrisonclairen theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT niederwieserdietger theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT demuynckhilde theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT jakelnadja theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT gopalakrishnaprashanth theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT mcquittymari theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT stalbovskayaviktoriya theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT recherchristian theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT theunissenkoen theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT gisslingerheinz theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT kiladjianjeanjacques theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT alalihaifakathrin theuseoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT mcmullinmaryfrances useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT harrisonclairen useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT niederwieserdietger useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT demuynckhilde useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT jakelnadja useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT gopalakrishnaprashanth useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT mcquittymari useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT stalbovskayaviktoriya useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT recherchristian useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT theunissenkoen useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT gisslingerheinz useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT kiladjianjeanjacques useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis
AT alalihaifakathrin useoferythropoiesisstimulatingagentswithruxolitinibinpatientswithmyelofibrosisincomfortiianopenlabelphase3studyassessingefficacyandsafetyofruxolitinibversusbestavailabletherapyinthetreatmentofmyelofibrosis