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...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
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 |