Category Archives: Clinical Trial

Ruxolitinib Improves Spleen Volume, TSS in Myelofibrosis Irrespective of Anemia, Transfusion Status

Posted on by

Gina Mauro
Conference|European Hematology Association Congress

Ruxolitinib was found to improve spleen volume and tumor symptom score in patients with myelofibrosis, irrespective of their anemia and transfusion status, according to data from a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 COMFORT-I and -II trials.

Ruxolitinib (Jakafi) was found to improve spleen volume and tumor symptom score (TSS) in patients with myelofibrosis, irrespective of their anemia and transfusion status, according to data from a post-hoc analysis of the phase 3 COMFORT-I (NCT00952289) and -II (NCT00934544) trials that were published during the 2023 EHA Congress.1

Results showed that the reduction in spleen volume of 35% or greater from baseline (SVR35) rates at week 24 in patients with new or worsening anemia up to week 12 were 48.8%, 33.3%, and 41.4%, respectively, for those who were nonanemic, anemic/nontransfusion dependent, and anemic/transfusion dependent at baseline. These rates were 43.2%, 23.1%, and 28.2%, respectively, in patients who did not have new or worsening anemia at week 24.

SVR35 at week 48 was achieved in 42.1%, 44.1%, and 34.6% of patients who had new or worsening anemia and were nonanemic, anemic/nontransfusion dependent, and anemic/transfusion dependent at baseline compared with 42.4%, 22.2%, and 27.3% in those who did not have new or worsening anemia.

A 50% or greater reduction in TSS at week 24 was achieved by 51.1%, 42.1%, and 46.7% of those with new or worsening anemia up to week 12 and who were nonanemic, anemic/nontransfusion dependent, or anemic/transfusion dependent at baseline. In patients who did not have new or worsening anemia up to week 12, these rates were 42.9%, 40.0%, and 54.2%, respectively.

Ruxolitinib, a JAK1/2 inhibitor, is indicated for patients with intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis. The FDA approval for ruxolitinib in this setting was based off findings from the COMFORT-I2 and COMFORT-II3 trials. Findings showed that ruxolitinib demonstrated a reduction in spleen volume, improved myelofibrosis-related symptoms, and prolonged overall survival. This was in comparison with placebo in COMFORT-I and with best available therapy (BAT) in COMFORT-II.

Transient dose-dependent anemia is a treatment-related adverse effect (TRAE) that has been observed with ruxolitinib. In COMFORT-I, grade 3/4 anemia occurred in 45.2% of patients on ruxolitinib vs 19.2% with placebo. In COMFORT-II, the most frequently reported serious adverse effect in both arms was anemia (5% with ruxolitinib vs 4% with BAT).

Therefore, in the post-hoc analysis presented during the congress, investigators sought to determine how new or worsening anemia from ruxolitinib treatment impacts SVR and TSS in this patient population.1

Patients were treated with ruxolitinib twice daily with an initial dose based on platelet count. For those with a platelet count of 100 to 200 x 109/L, the dose was 15 mg vs 20 mg for those whose platelet count was above 200 x 109/L. Stratification factors included anemia status at baseline (yes vs no) and transfusion status at baseline (transfusion dependent vs nontransfusion dependent).

Anemia was defined as hemoglobin less than 100 g/L and patients were considered transfusion dependent if they received 2 or more units of red blood cells over 8 to 12 weeks before their first dose of ruxolitinib. Investigators stratified outcomes via presence or absence of new or worsening anemia postbaseline, which was defined as a decrease in hemoglobin of at least 15 g/L or new transfusion requirement at weeks 4, 8, or 12.

Specifically, investigators assessed patients with a reduction in spleen volume of at least 35% from baseline from the pooled COMFORT-I/-II data at weeks 24 and 48, and with at least a 50% reduction in modified Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form TSS at week 24, from the COMFORT-I data.

A total of 277 patients were included in the analysis. Regarding baseline characteristics, the median age ranged from 65.0 to 71.0 years, and between 47% and 56% were male. More than half of patients were baseline nonanemic (n = 154; 55.6%) 19.9% (n = 55) were anemic/nontransfusion dependent, and 24.5% (n = 68) were anemia/transfusion dependent.

References

  1. Al-Ali HK, Mesa R, Hamer-Maansson JE, Braunstein E, Harrison, C. Effect of new or worsening anemia on clinical outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) treated with ruxolitinib (RUX): a post hoc analysis of the COMFORT-I and -II trials. Presented at: 2023 European Hematology Association Congress; June 8-11, 2023; Frankfurt, Germany. Abstract PB2185.
  2. Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(9):799-807. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1110557
  3. Harrison C, Kiladjian J-J, Al-Ali HK, et al. JAK Inhibition with ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:787-798. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1110556.

Read more

Rusfertide Offers Durable Hematocrit Control in Phlebotomy-Dependent Polycythemia Vera

Posted on by

June 11, 2023

Caroline Seymour

Rusfertide (PTG-300) demonstrated freedom from phlebotomy, sustained hematocrit control, and 12-week treatment completion in 69.2% (n = 18/26) vs 18.5% (n = 5/27) of patients with phlebotomy-dependent polycythemia vera who received placebo (P = .0003), meeting the primary end point of the phase 2 REVIVE trial (NCT04057040). Findings were presented at the 2023 EHA Congress.

“The REVIVE study demonstrated significantly higher efficacy with rusfertide compared with placebo in subjects with polycythemia vera,” said Marina Kremyanskaya, MD, PhD, lead study author and assistant professor of medicine, hematology, and medical oncology at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York, New York, in a presentation of the data. “Current standard-of-care therapy in polycythemia vera does not consistently maintain hematocrit below 45%, thereby potentially increasing the risk of thromboembolic events. Rusfertide has the potential to consistently maintain hematocrit [levels] below 45%.”

Polycythemia vera is a myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) that produces red blood cells in excess and is often marked by elevated hematocrit. Hematocrit, when uncontrolled, can lead to higher fatality from cardiovascular causes or thrombotic events. Although guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network and European LeukemiaNet state that hematocrit should be maintained below 45%, current standard-of-care therapy fails to do so in most patients.

Hepcidin is a peptide hormone that controls iron availability for red blood cell formation. Rusfertide is a novel hepcidin mimetic that mirrors the effects of hepcidin on erythropoiesis, representing a potential add-on therapy to standard therapy with improved activity. This hypothesis was tested in the phase 2 REVIVE trial.

To be eligible for enrollment in the study, patients had to have phlebotomy-dependent polycythemia vera per 2016 World Health Organization criteria, having received at least 3 phlebotomies in 28 weeks with or without concurrent cytoreductive therapy. Additionally, all patients had to be phlebotomized to hematocrit levels below 45% prior to the first dose of rusfertide to standardize the starting hematocrit.

The study consisted of 3 parts: dose finding, blinded randomized withdrawal, and open-label extension. Rusfertide was administered subcutaneously in doses ranging from 10 mg to 120 mg weekly. In part 1, rusfertide was titrated for the first 16 weeks to determine the clinically effective dose. Efficacy was evaluated in weeks 17 to 28. In part 2, patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive active or placebo doses of rusfertide in weeks 29 to 41. Study treatment continued in part 3 for up to 3 years.

Safety and efficacy served as key end points of the trial. Efficacy was characterized by the proportion of responders in part 2, defined by the proportion of patients who maintained hematocrit below 45% and the percentage reduction in phlebotomies. Patient outcomes were evaluated with the MPN Symptoms Assessment Form Total Symptom Score.

A total of 70 patients were included in the dose-finding portion of the research. Fifty-nine patients were treated in part 2, 53 of which were included in the primary efficacy analysis set. Fifty-two patients are ongoing treatment in part 3

Regarding baseline characteristics of those included in part 2, most patients were male, above the age of 50 years at diagnosis, had polycythemia vera for approximately 5 years, and received hydroxyurea as the primary means of cytoreductive therapy. Across the arms, 52.7% of patients were high risk and 47.4% were low risk. Body mass index was 30.1 ± 5.76 kg/m2 and 28.7 ± 4.55 kg/m2 in the placebo and rusfertide arms, respectively.

Additional findings demonstrated similar benefit in time to treatment failure with rusfertide in responders (P < .0001), patients ineligible for phlebotomy plus hydroxyurea (P < .0001), and those with hematocrit under 45% (P < .0001).

Kremyanskaya also explained that rusfertide led to meaningful reductions in the need for phlebotomy, both with phlebotomy only (n = 37) and phlebotomy plus cytoreductive therapy (n = 33).

Although the focus of the presentation centered around outcomes in part 2, investigators also evaluated symptom improvement in part 1. Notably, moderate or severe symptoms of problems with concentration (P =.0018), itching (P = .0054), fatigue (P =.0074), and inactivity (P =.0005) were all improved following treatment with rusfertide. Kremyanskaya noted that meaningful comparison of symptom improvement was not possible in part 2 because most patients who were randomized to placebo discontinued prior to the 12-week symptom assessment.

In terms of safety, Kremyanskaya stated that rusfertide was “generally well tolerated.” Treatment-emergent adverse effects (TEAEs) included injection site erythema (64.3%), injection site pain (41.4%), injection site pruritus (40.4%), fatigue (31.4%), injection site mass (25.7%), pruritus (25.7%), arthralgia (24.3%), injection site swelling (24.3%), dizziness (22.9%), headache (22.9%), nausea (22.9%), anemia (20.0%), COVID-19 (20.0%), injection site irritation (18.6%), and injection site bruising (15.7%). Most events were grade 1/2 (83%), and 17% of patients experienced grade 3 events. No grade 5 events occurred.

“Most common TEAEs were injection site reactions, which decreased in incidence with continued treatment,” Kremyanskaya noted. “Additionally, events were localized, grade 1 or 2 in severity, and generally did not lead to treatment discontinuation,”

Two treatment-related events of mild thrombocytosis and recurrent grade 1 injection site erythema led to treatment discontinuation.

Patients who completed the REVIVE study will be eligible to enroll in PTG-300-21, a separate, 2-year follow-on extension trial. The agent is also under evaluation in the phase 3 VERIFY trial (NCT05210790), where it is being compared with placebo in patients with polycythemia vera maintaining hematocrit control and in improving symptoms of disease.

Disclosures: Dr Kremyanskaya reported receiving honoraria and being on the advisory board for Protagonist Therapeutics, Inc.

Reference

Kremyanskaya M, Kuykendall A, Pemmaraju N, et al. Targeted therapy of uncontrolled erythrocytosis in polycythemia vera with the hepcidin mimetic, rusfertide: – blinded randomized withdrawal results of the REVIVE study. Presented at: 2023 EHA Congress; June 8-11, 2023; Frankfurt, Germany. Abstract LBA2710.

Read more

Fedratinib and Ruxolitinib: Advice for Deciding Which Agent to Give and When

Posted on by

The introduction of fedratinib (Inrebic) to the treatment landscape of myelofibrosis (MF) and the challenges that have arisen over deciding between administering fedratinib or ruxolitinib (Jakafi) means more community oncologists should consult specialists when treating these patients, said Andrew Kuykendall, MD.

Research shows that fedratinib and the earlier JAK inhibitor, ruxolitinib have similar efficacy in patients with MF. However, their toxicity profiles differ, and the potential for encephalopathy with fedratinib is an ongoing concern, resulting in a black box warning on the label. Now that the agent is FDA approved for the treatment of MF, oncologists are left with a decision of which JAK inhibitor to give to which patients and when to prescribe them.

How to continue using ruxolitinib now that fedratinib is available remains an unanswered question, said Kuykendall, assistant member, Moffitt Cancer Center; however, experts in treating myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) can be a helpful resource for other oncologists.

Another resource for treatment decision-making is clinical data from the JAKARTA-2 trial, which studied fedratinib in patients with MF who were previously treated with ruxolitinib. Findings from a re-analysis of the study were presented at the 2019 ASCO Annual Meeting and showed that 46 of the 83 assessable patients achieved a spleen response (55%; 95% CI, 44%-66%), meeting the primary endpoint of the study.

The most common adverse events included diarrhea (n = 60), nausea (n = 54), vomiting (n = 40), constipation (n = 20), and others. Additionally, hematologic abnormalities including, grade 3/4 anemia (n = 96), thrombocytopenia (n = 68), and neutropenia (n = 23) were seen. Eighteen patients (19%) discontinued treatment due to adverse events.

These data suggest that fedratinib may be a second-line option for patients who are resistant or sensitive to ruxolitinib. The management of the gastrointestinal (GI)-related toxicities and checking of thymine levels to prevent encephalopathy, however, are newer management concerns that physicians must be aware of when administering fedratinib to patients with MF and is another point when consulting an MPN specialist may come in handy.

Read Targeted Oncology’s interview with Dr. Kuykendall.

Watch Behind the Mystery: Living with Polycythemia Vera

Posted on by

The Lifetime Channel’s The Balancing Act featured a story this week on polycythemia vera (PV), with experts Dr. Richard T. Silver, a professor of medicine at NewYork–Presbyterian/Weill Cornell Medical Center, and Dr. Srdan Verstovsek of the MD Anderson Cancer Center, who discuss the latest inpatient care and clinical trials for PV, as well as the future for those living with PV as a chronic illness. Learn More

Learn more about MPN Clinical Trials