Tag Archives: mpn

Rovadicitinib Bests Hydroxyurea in Myelofibrosis

Posted on by
Erin Clancy

The JAK2 inhibitor rovadicitinib proved more effective than hydroxyurea in patients with JAK inhibitor-naïve, intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis in a phase 2 trial presented at the ESMO Congress 2024.

These results “support the use of rovadicitinib as a new treatment option” for these patients, said study presenter Ling Pan, of West China Hospital, Sichuan University, in Chengdu, China.

The trial (NCT05020652) enrolled 105 patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary, post-polycythemia vera, or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis. All patients had received no prior JAK inhibitor treatment and had palpable splenomegaly.

Patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive rovadicitinib at 15 mg twice daily plus placebo (n=72) or hydroxyurea at 0.5 g twice daily plus placebo (n=35). Baseline characteristics were well balanced between the arms.

Treatment continued for 24 weeks, at which point patients who achieved a spleen volume reduction of 35% or greater (SVR35) maintained treatment as assigned. Those who had not achieved SVR35 by week 24 received open-label rovadicitinib at 15 mg twice daily until treatment termination criteria were met.

At week 24, the SVR35 rate was 58.33% in the rovadicitinib arm and 22.86% in the hydroxyurea arm (P =.0006). The best spleen response rate during the study period was 63.89% with rovadicitinib and 31.43% with hydroxyurea (P =.0017).

The proportion of patients who achieved a 50% or greater reduction in total symptom score at week 24 was 61.11% with rovadicitinib and 45.71% with hydroxyurea (P =.136). The best symptom response rate during the study period was 77.78% with rovadicitinib and 54.29% with hydroxyurea (P =.0136).

Eighteen patients who initially received hydroxyurea but switched to rovadicitinib after week 24 were included in the safety analysis, so 90 patients were evaluable in the rovadicitinib arm and 35 patients were evaluable in the hydroxyurea arm.

The rate of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 97.78% in the rovadicitinib arm and 100% in the hydroxyurea arm. The rate of grade 3 or higher TEAEs was 51.11% and 77.14%, respectively. The rate of serious TEAEs was 31.11% and 40.00%, respectively.

The most common grade 3 or higher hematologic TEAEs (in the rovadicitinib and hydroxyurea arms, respectively) were platelet count decrease (20.00% and 17.14%) and anemia (28.89% and 60.00%). The most common grade 3 or higher non-hematologic TEAE was hyperkalemia (6.67%) in the rovadicitinib arm and weight gain (2.86%) in the hydroxyurea arm.

Read more

Patients With Lower-Risk Myelofibrosis May Respond to Jakafi

Posted on by

By Darlene Dobkowski, MA
Fact checked by Ashley Chan

Responses to treatment with Jakafi (ruxolitinib) were more frequent and durable in patients with intermediate-1 risk (low-risk) myelofibrosis, according to findings from a real-world study.

In addition, patients with intermediate-2 (high-risk) myelofibrosis had lower rates of toxicity from Jakafi treatment, as shown in findings from the study published in the journal Cancer.

After six months of treatment with Jakafi, spleen response rates were observed in 26.8% of patients, with symptom response rates in 67.9% of patients with intermediate-1 risk myelofibrosis.

“Splenomegaly (enlarged spleen) and symptoms may be extremely burdensome also in lower-risk patients, with approximately 40% of such patients starting [Jakafi] with a large splenomegaly and a high symptom score,” the study authors wrote. “This finding again supports how the clinical phenotype of [myelofibrosis] should guide the medical therapeutic approach, without being influenced by the prognostic risk category, which, in contrast, is essential instead for the transplant decision.”

Predictors of responses at six months after initiating treatment with Jakafi included no cytopenia (a condition with a lower-than-normal number of blood cells, which can include hemoglobin levels, platelets and white blood cells), no high-molecular-risk mutations and blasts less than 1%. Out of all these factors, high-molecular-risk mutations continued to have a significant association with responses.

According to The Leukemia & Lymphoma Society, blasts are immature blood cells that are a result of mutated stem cells multiplying uncontrollably. They do not mature into healthy blood cells, nor do they function as such. Abnormal blasts, over time, can surpass the bone marrow’s production of normal healthy blood cells.

At the start of the study, 595 of the 1,055 patients (56.2%) with myelofibrosis had intermediate-1 risk according to two different scoring systems used to classify risk (Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System and Myelofibrosis Score With Constitutional Symptoms – Peripheral Myeloid Immaturity). Both of these scoring systems take into account certain factors like hemoglobin levels, platelet count, spleen size and symptoms.

The spleen was palpable (meaning that it is enlarged and could be felt through the abdominal wall) at the lower edge of the rib cage at less than 5 centimeters in 5.9% of patients, between 5 and 10 centimeters in 47.4% and greater than 10 centimeters in 39.7%. Of note, 54.1% of patients were highly symptomatic.

Read more

Vonjo Improves Thrombocytopenia, Anemia in Patients With Myelofibrosis

Posted on by

By Jax DiEugenio
Fact checked by Chris Ryan

Improvements in thrombocytopenia and anemia were observed in patients with myelofibrosis treated with Vonjo (pacritinib) in the real-world setting, as demonstrated in findings from a retrospective study presented at the 2024 SOHO Annual Meeting.

According to the National Cancer Institute, thrombocytopenia refers to a condition in which patients have a lower-than-normal number of platelets in the blood, and this can result in excessive bleeding from wounds and easy bruising. Anemia is a condition when patients have a low count of red blood cells.

Findings showed that patients with a platelet count below 100 x 109/L (which is considered low) at baseline (74 patients) experienced an early increase in platelet count following treatment initiation that was maintained throughout the observation period. Additionally, an early increase in median hemoglobin (a protein inside red blood cells that carries oxygen from lungs to tissues and organs) was reported in all patients, and this increase was sustained throughout the observation period. Patients with hemoglobin level of less than 8 g/dL (a level that indicates anemia) at the start of treatment (35 patients) experienced a hemoglobin increase of nearly 1 g/dL by day 30.

Notably, patients who received prior treatment with Jakafi (ruxolitinib; 69 patients) experienced an increase in platelet counts and hemoglobin levels following initiation of Vonjo. At baseline, the median platelet count and median hemoglobin level in this population was 91 x 109/L and 8.7 g/dL, respectively. At day 360, the median platelet count and median hemoglobin were 97 x 109/L and 10.4 g/dL, respectively.

“In addition to spleen and symptom benefits observed in previous clinical trials, real-world outcomes demonstrate stability or improvement in thrombocytopenia and/or anemia in patients with myelofibrosis treated with [Vonjo],” lead study author Michael Marrone and colleagues, wrote in a poster presentation of the data. Marrone is an assistant professor in the College of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston.

Read more

Novel approach may eliminate survival disparity in HSCT, greatly expand access

Posted on by

September 17, 2024

Key takeaways:

  • Post-transplant cyclophosphamide prophylaxis reduced the OS disparity in matched vs. mismatched unrelated donor hematopoietic stem cell transplant.
  • The approach could expand access to HSCT.

Use of post-transplant cyclophosphamide prophylaxis to prevent graft-versus-host disease could greatly expand access to hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, according to results of a retrospective study.

An analysis of patients who received post-transplant cyclophosphamide (PTCy) showed no statistically significant difference in OS or GVHD-free RFS (GRFS) between patients with matched (8/8) or mismatched (7/8) unrelated donors.

The ability to find a suitable unrelated donor with a 7/8 HLA match is “much greater” than finding one with 8/8 HLA match, according to researcher Steven M. Devine, MD, chief medical officer at NMDP and senior scientific director at Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR), told Healio.

“For an African American patient, [chances] go from 30% to over 80%,” Devine said. “It’s even higher for Hispanic or Asian individuals — into the 90% range.

“If you can go even lower [to a 6/8 match or 5/8 match], you can pretty much find a volunteer unrelated donor for almost 100% of patients,” Devine added. “We are enabling a transplant for everyone, regardless of their ancestry.”

Access disparities

Allogeneic HSCT — used to treat multiple blood cancers and blood disorders — produces the best results when stem cells of a related or unrelated donor matches at 8/8 HLA markers at the HLA-A, -B, -C and -DRB1 genes, according to study background.

Only 30% of patients have siblings, who are HLA-identical matches and therefore could donate.

Non-Hispanic white individuals have a 79% likelihood of finding an unrelated matched donor in the NMDP registry. The rate is between 29% and 58% for people of other races and ethnicities.

“Historically, there’s been roughly a 10% lower chance of survival with each level of mismatch,” Devine said. “That’s why for years the focus has been on trying to find full matches for all patients.”

Cyclophosphamide, a chemotherapy drug used to treat a variety of solid tumors and hematologic cancers, has been repurposed for about 20 years to prevent GVHD after HSCT.

“It’s really revolutionized [stem cell transplant] because its use is associated with a much lower risk for both the acute and more chronic forms of GVHD,” Devine said. “It’s improved outcomes overall, and it’s allowed us to perform mismatched transplants both from related and unrelated donors. So, [for this study], we [wondered whether] those historical differences in outcomes between matched and mismatched transplant [are] as great as they were years ago now that we’re using PTCy.”

Read more

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions | Choosing and Properly Using a JAK Inhibitor in Myelofibrosis

Posted on by

Michael J. Hochmanm, Colin A. Vale, Anthony M. Hunter

Abstract

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a chronic myeloid neoplasm characterized by myeloproliferation, bone marrow fibrosis, splenomegaly, and constitutional symptoms related to pro-inflammatory cytokine signaling. Biologically, MF is characterized by constitutive activation of JAK-STAT signaling; accordingly, JAK inhibitors have been rationally developed to treat MF. Following the initial approval of ruxolitinib in 2011, three additional agents have been approved: fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib. As these therapies are non-curative, allogeneic stem cell transplantation remains a key treatment modality and patients with MF who are deemed candidates should be referred to a transplant center. This potentially curative but toxic approach is typically reserved for patients with higher-risk disease, and JAK inhibitors are recommended in the pre-transplant setting. JAK inhibitors have proven effective at managing splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms and should be started early in the disease course in patients presenting with these clinical manifestations; asymptomatic patients may initially be followed with close surveillance. Drug-related myelosuppression has been a challenge with initial JAK inhibitors, particularly in patients presenting with a cytopenic phenotype. However, newer agents, namely pacritinib and momelotinib, have proven more effective in this setting and are approved for patients with significant thrombocytopenia and anemia, respectively. Resistance or disease progression is clinically challenging and may be defined by several possible events, such as increasing splenomegaly or progression to accelerated or blast phase disease. However, with multiple JAK inhibitors now approved, sequencing of these agents appears poised to improve outcomes. Additionally, novel JAK inhibitors and JAK inhibitor-based combinations are in clinical development.

Read more

Ruxolitinib Stands Out Among JAK2 Inhibitors for Myelofibrosis

Posted on by

By Targeted Oncology Staff

In this virtual tumor board discussion, experts review the case of a 68-year-old woman diagnosed with primary myelofibrosis. The discussion focuses on recent data and emerging insights to guide clinical decision-making and explore the latest advances in treatment strategies for this challenging disease.

Prithvira J. Bose, MD: What are the first steps you would take for this patient, and how do you view multidisciplinary collaboration?

Julie Huynh-Lu, PA-C: Specific to [The University of Texas] MD Anderson [Cancer Center], the role of the physician assistant or nurse practitioner in the leukemia department is to evaluate the patient. Aside from doing a review of systems, I go over the myeloproliferative neoplasms [MPN] questionnaire with the patients to review any changes in their score. Whether they have started therapy or not, [we determine whether they] need to be on therapy based on their answers.

I do a physical assessment of the patient checking their spleen. We don’t order ultrasounds or CT scans on patients unless we’re unable to palpate due to pain in that area. I’ll measure the spleen size every time the patient comes in with a tape measure.

Having a second set of eyes evaluating the patient [is key] because some questions that I may ask, someone else may not—or the physician may ask questions that I may not know [to ask]. Collaboration among nurses, physician assistants or nurse practitioners, and physicians in compiling patient information ensures the best care for the patient.

We are lucky to have the MPN10 form in the Epic system on our flow sheet, and patients can fill out this form before they check in for their appointment. If they were unable to fill it out, I can go into that flow sheet, ask those questions, and fill it out with them. Then, the score [generates] for each patient.

Read more

Phase 3 Trial of Bomedemstat in Essential Thrombocythemia Begins Enrollment

Posted on by

By Sabrina Serani
Fact checked by Jordyn Sava

A pivotal phase 3 trial (NCT06456346) has initiated to evaluate bomedemstat (MK-3543; IMG-7289), an investigational agent for the treatment of patients with essential thrombocythemia (ET) who have previously not received cytoreductive therapy.1

“The standard of care in essential thrombocythemia has remained unchanged for decades, and patients are in need of new options that have the potential to not only improve disease control, but also improve their quality of life,” said Gregory Lubiniecki, MD, vice president, global clinical development, Merck Research Laboratories, in a press release. “We are rapidly advancing our clinical development programs with the goal of helping to address these unmet needs and bring more options to patients living with myeloproliferative neoplasms.”

The Shorespan-007 trial will compare the orally available LSD1 inhibitor bomedemstat with standard-of-care hydroxyurea in patients with treatment-naive ET, the most common myeloproliferative neoplasm. LSD1 is an enzyme that is potentially important for regulating the proliferation of hematopoietic stem cells, as well as the maturation of progenitor cells.

The study’s primary end point is durable clinicohematologic response rate, and secondary end points include duration of hematologic remission, event-free survival, incidence of adverse events, and disease progression rate. Additionally, investigators will be patient-reported outcomes, including fatigue and symptoms.

The FDA previously granted orphan drug and fast track designations to bomedemstat in ET and myelofibrosis, as well as orphan drug designation in acute myeloid leukemia.

Read more

Donor Source Does Not Impact Survival for HCT in Myelofibrosis

Posted on by
Vicki Moore, PhD

For patients with myelofibrosis (MF) who received hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT), a study showed that overall survival (OS) outcomes at 3 months were similar whether haploidentical or matched unrelated donor (MUD) HCT was used. Study results were published in the journal Blood Advances.

The study was based on data obtained from the Center for International Blood and Marrow Transplant Research (CIBMTR) registry. This analysis of donor trends included data for adults in the registry who received an initial HCT between January 2013 and December 2019 for primary or post-essential thrombocythemia or post-polycythemia vera MF. The study’s primary endpoint was OS.

There were 1597 HCTs identified over the study period. Among these, in 2013 there were 117 HCTs performed, while in 2019 this number had risen to 371. Additionally, the proportion of HCTs that involved haploidentical donors rose from 3% of total HCTs in 2013 to 19% in 2019.

Overall, 1032 patients met eligibility criteria for inclusion in further analyses for this study. Patients whose HCT involved mismatched unrelated donors (MMUDs; 64 patients) had a median age at HCT of 59.3 years, while patients with matched sibling donors (MSDs; 298 patients) had a median age at HCT of 61.4 years, patients with haploidentical donors had a median age of 62.5 years (119 patients), and patients with MUDs had a median age of 63 years (551 patients).

The median follow-up period was 46.5 months (range, 3.7-99.7) in this study. In univariate analyses, the 3-year OS rates were estimated to be 68.8% (95% CI, 63.3-74.1) for recipients of MSD-HCT, 59% (95% CI, 49.7-67.9) for recipients of haploidentical HCT, 61.3% (95% CI, 57.1-65.4) for recipients of MUD-HCT, and 55.2% (95% CI, 42.7-67.4) for recipients of MMUD-HCT (P =.03).

Read more

Real-World Data for Pacritinib Show Improvement in Thrombocytopenia, Anemia in Myelofibrosis

Posted on by

September 10, 2024

Author(s): Jax DiEugenio

Fact checked by: Chris Ryan

Pacritinib (Vonjo) generated improvements in thrombocytopenia and anemia in patients with myelofibrosis treated in the real-world setting, according to data from a retrospective study presented at the 2024 SOHO Annual Meeting.1

Findings showed that patients with a platelet count below 100 x 109/L at baseline (n = 74) experienced an early increase in platelet count following treatment initiation that was maintained throughout the observation period. Additionally, an early increase in median hemoglobin was reported in all patients, and this increase was sustained throughout the observation period. Patients with hemoglobin level of less than 8.0 g/dL at the start of treatment (n = 35) experienced a hemoglobin increase of nearly 1 g/dL by day 30.

Notably, patients who received prior treatment with ruxolitinib (Jakafi; n = 69) experienced an increase in platelet counts and hemoglobin levels following initiation of pacritinib. At baseline, the median platelet count and median hemoglobin level in this population was 91.0 x 109/L and 8.7 g/dL, respectively. At day 360, the median platelet count and median hemoglobin were 97.0 x 109/L and 10.4 g/dL, respectively.

“In addition to spleen and symptom benefits observed in previous clinical trials, real-world outcomes demonstrate stability or improvement in thrombocytopenia and/or anemia in patients with myelofibrosis treated with pacritinib,” lead study author Michael Marrone, PhD, MPH, and colleagues, wrote in a poster presentation of the data. Marrone is an assistant professor in the College of Medicine, Department of Public Health Sciences, at the Medical University of South Carolina in Charleston.

Read more

Managing Ruxolitinib-Associated Liver Toxicity in Patients With Myelofibrosis Requires a Nuanced Approach

Posted on by
September 4, 2024

William J. Hogan, MBBCh, MRCPI

Key Points:

  • Ruxolitinib plays an important role in the treatment of symptomatic myelofibrosis, but its associated toxicities and adverse withdrawal effects can pose a challenge.
  • Myelofibrosis is linked with hepatic dysfunction, and ruxolitinib—despite its associated risks of hepatic transaminitis—may limit inflammation and progressive fibrosis, with liver injury resolution reported after treatment.
  • Overall, management of liver injury related to ruxolitinib depends on the cause and severity.

 

Question: In patients with myelofibrosis, how do you manage liver toxicity from ruxolitinib use beside dose de-escalation?

Answer: Ruxolitinib is a small-molecule JAK1/2 inhibitor that has an established role in the treatment of patients with symptomatic myelofibrosis, hydroxyurea-resistant polycythemia vera, and acute and chronic graft-versus-host disease. It has a potent anti-inflammatory effect that can provide very useful palliation of constitutional symptoms and splenomegaly in patients with myelofibrosis via inhibition of the JAK 1 and 2 pathways, which are involved in the production of inflammatory cytokines and hematopoietic growth factors.1-3 Common toxicities include myelosuppression, hepatic transaminitis, diarrhea, fatigue, headache, and peripheral edema. In patients with advanced myelofibrosis or florid inflammatory states, sudden withdrawal can lead to a systemic inflammatory response syndrome that can precipitate cardiopulmonary decompensation in frail patients, especially those with tenuous cardiopulmonary function, and corticosteroid prophylaxis or treatment may be required.4

In a mouse model of liver injury using carbon tetrachloride, JAK1/2 expression was implicated in progression of liver fibrosis. Inhibition of JAK1/2 downregulates downstream signaling, reduces progression to fibrosis, and even accelerates fibrosis reversal by inhibiting proliferation, migration, and activation of hepatic stellate cells in vitro.5 Myelofibrosis is associated with hepatic dysfunction by several mechanisms, including infiltration by hematopoietic stem cells (ie, extramedullary hematopoiesis [EMH]), portal vein thrombosis, and obliterative portal venopathy. EMH may respond favorably to ruxolitinib, and liver injury resolution after ruxolitinib treatment has been reported in patients with severe liver compromise related to myelofibrosis.6 These findings suggest that the drug may be able to reduce the consequences of inflammation—limiting progressive fibrosis in some circumstances—and may be of durable benefit in selected patients. A retrospective review of patients with liver injury and underlying myeloproliferative disorders treated with ruxolitinib and evaluated by biopsy demonstrated a variety of etiologies7; however, it is not always easy to determine how much is related to the underlying disease versus drug effects based on the biopsy findings, and this distinction is predominantly a clinical decision.

Liver toxicity typically manifests as mild hepatic transaminitis and can be exacerbated by drug–drug interactions. The incidence of hepatic transaminitis has been reported to be between 25% and 50%. Typically, these elevations are mild and self-limited, with < 1.5% of patients having values > 5 times the upper limit of normal. The drug is metabolized in the liver predominantly via the CYP3A4 pathway, and liver injury may be the result of the production of a toxic intermediate. Drug–drug interactions, such as with azole antifungals, can increase the effective exposure and enhance the potential for toxicity. Because suppression of intracellular signaling impairs immune response, suppression of viral replication may be impaired, increasing the potential for reactivation of quiescent viruses. This has been reported with reactivation of hepatitis B, resulting in clinically meaningful liver injury in patients who are at risk. It appears that the risk of viral reactivation with transaminitis and hyperbilirubinemia is greater in patients with HBsAg positivity, but reactivation has also been reported in those with anti-HBc. Efficacy with entecavir has been reported in treating viral reactivation and prophylaxis, so a nucleoside analog such as entecavir or tenofovir should be considered in patients who are at high risk.8-10

Management of liver injury related to ruxolitinib depends on the cause and severity. Identifying contributing causes, such as drug–drug interactions and prior viral hepatitis exposure and excluding other hepatotoxins are the initial imperative. Prior viral exposure with reactivation should be treated or prophylaxed when applicable. For mild transaminase elevations without hyperbilirubinemia, monitoring or temporary dose reduction may be appropriate. In more significant liver injury, dose interruption may be necessary. Consideration of an alternative JAK inhibitor may occasionally be warranted, as there does not appear to be significant evidence to suggest cross-reactivity between ruxolitinib and other JAK inhibitors. Of note, a retrospective review of liver injury occurring in patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms receiving ruxolitinib suggested a variety of potential etiologies, including those unrelated to the drug itself (EMH), in addition to obstructive portal vein apathy and drug-induced liver injury.

Read more