Anagrelide influences thrombotic risk, and prolongs progression-free and overall survival in essential thrombocythaemia vs hydroxyurea plus aspirin

OBJECTIVE

We report an extension study of patients with essential thrombocythaemia (ET) in the Hungarian Myeloproliferative Neoplasm (HUMYPRON) Registry, which demonstrated that over 6 years anagrelide significantly decreased the number of patients experiencing minor arterial and minor venous thrombotic events (TEs) vs hydroxyurea+aspirin.

METHODS

Data on patients with ET were collected through completion of a questionnaire developed according to 2008 WHO diagnostic criteria and with regard to Landolfi, Tefferi and IPSET criteria for thrombotic risk. Data were entered into the registry from 14 haematological centres. TEs, secondary malignancies, disease progression and survival were compared between patients with ET treated with anagrelide (n = 116) and with hydroxyurea+aspirin (n = 121).

RESULTS

Patients were followed for (median) 10 years. A between-group difference in the number of patients with TEs was observed (25.9% anagrelide vs 38.0% hydroxyurea+aspirin; P = .052). Minor arterial events were more frequently reported in the hydroxyurea+aspirin group (P < .001); there were marginally more reports of major arterial events in the anagrelide group (P = .049). TE prior to diagnosis was found to significantly influence TE incidence (P > .001). Progression-free survival (P = .004) and survival (P = .001) were significantly increased for the anagrelide group vs hydroxyurea+aspirin.

CONCLUSIONS

Anagrelide reduced TEs, and increased progression-free and overall survival vs hydroxyurea+aspirin over (median) 10 years.

Selinexor in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (SADAL): a single-arm, multinational, multicentre, open-label, phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is an aggressive cancer with a median overall survival of less than 6 months. We aimed to assess the response to single-agent selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export, in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who had no therapeutic options of potential clinical benefit.

METHODS

SADAL was a multicentre, multinational, open-label, phase 2b study done in 59 sites in 19 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with pathologically confirmed diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less, who had received two to five lines of previous therapies, and progressed after or were not candidates for autologous stem-cell transplantation were enrolled. Germinal centre B-cell or non-germinal centre B-cell tumour subtype and double or triple expressor status were determined by immunohistochemistry and double or triple hit status was determined by cytogenetics. Patients received 60 mg selinexor orally on days 1 and 3 weekly until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The study was initially designed to evaluate both 60 mg and 100 mg twice-weekly doses of selinexor; however, the 100 mg dose was discontinued in the protocol (version 7.0) on March 29, 2017, when an improved therapeutic window was observed at 60 mg. Primary outcome was overall response rate. The primary outcome and safety were assessed in all patients who received 60 mg selinexor under protocol version 6.0, or enrolled under protocol versions 7.0 or higher and received at least one dose of selinexor. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02227251 (active but not enrolling).

FINDINGS

Between Oct 21, 2015, and Nov 2, 2019, 267 patients were randomly assigned, with 175 allocated to the 60 mg group and 92 to the discontinued 100 mg group. 48 patients assigned to the 60 mg group were excluded due to enrolment before version 6.0 of the protocol; the remaining 127 patients received selinexor 60 mg and were included in analyses of primary outcome and safety. The overall response rate was 28% (36/127; 95% CI 20·7-37·0); 15 (12%) achieved a complete response and 21 (17%) a partial response. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (n=58), neutropenia (n=31), anaemia (n=28), fatigue (n=14), hyponatraemia (n=10), and nausea (n=8). The most common serious adverse events were pyrexia (n=9), pneumonia (n=6), and sepsis (n=6). There were no deaths judged as related to treatment with selinexor.

INTERPRETATION

Single-drug oral selinexor induced durable responses and had a manageable adverse events profile in patients with relapsed or refractory DLBCL who received at least two lines of previous chemoimmunotherapy. Selinexor could be considered a new oral, non-cytotoxic treatment option in this setting.

FUNDING

Karyopharm Therapeutics Inc.

Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab versus chlorambucil and obinutuzmab for treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (ELEVATE TN): a randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Acalabrutinib is a selective, covalent Bruton tyrosine-kinase inhibitor with activity in chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. We compare the efficacy of acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab against chlorambucil with obinutuzumab in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

METHODS

ELEVATE TN is a global, phase 3, multicentre, open-label study in patients with treatment-naive chronic lymphocytic leukaemia done at 142 academic and community hospitals in 18 countries. Eligible patients had untreated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia and were aged 65 years or older, or older than 18 years and younger than 65 years with creatinine clearance of 30-69 mL/min (calculated by use of the Cockcroft-Gault equation) or Cumulative Illness Rating Scale for Geriatrics score greater than 6. Additional criteria included an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 2 or less and adequate haematologic, hepatic, and renal function. Patients with significant cardiovascular disease were excluded, and concomitant treatment with warfarin or equivalent vitamin K antagonists was prohibited. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) centrally via an interactive voice or web response system to receive acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab, acalabrutinib monotherapy, or obinutuzumab and oral chlorambucil. Treatments were administered in 28-day cycles. To reduce infusion-related reactions, acalabrutinib was administered for one cycle before obinutuzumab administration. Oral acalabrutinib was administered (100 mg) twice a day until progressive disease or unacceptable toxic effects occurred. In the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 2 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 3-7. In the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group, intravenous obinutuzumab was given on days 1 (100 mg), 2 (900 mg), 8 (1000 mg), and 15 (1000 mg) of cycle 1 and on day 1 (1000 mg) of cycles 2-6. Oral chlorambucil was given (0·5 mg/kg) on days 1 and 15 of each cycle, for six cycles. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival between the two combination-therapy groups, assessed by independent review committee. Crossover to acalabrutinib was allowed in patients who progressed on obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment. Enrolment for this trial is complete, and the study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02475681.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 14, 2015, and Feb 8, 2017, we recruited 675 patients for assessment. 140 patients did not meet eligibility criteria, and 535 patients were randomly assigned to treatment. 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 179 patients were assigned to receive acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 177 patients were assigned to receive obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. At median follow-up of 28·3 months (IQR 25·6-33·1), median progression-free survival was longer with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab and acalabrutinib monotherapy, compared with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (median not reached with acalabrutinib and obinutuzumab vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, hazard ratio [HR] 0·1; 95% CI 0·06-0·17, p<0·0001; and not reached with acalabrutinib monotherapy vs 22·6 months with obinutuzumab, 0·20; 0·13-0·3, p<0·0001). Estimated progression-free survival at 24 months was 93% with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (95% CI 87-96%), 87% with acalabrutinib monotherapy (81-92%), and 47% with obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (39-55%). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse event across groups was neutropenia (53 [30%] of 178 patients in the acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab group, 17 [9%] of 179 patients in the acalabrutinib group, and 70 [41%] of 169 patients in the obinutuzumab-chlorambucil group). All-grade infusion reactions were less frequent with acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab (24 [13%] of 178 patients) than obinutuzumab-chlorambucil (67 [40%] of 169 patients). Grade 3 or higher infections occurred in 37 (21%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 25 (14%) patients given acalabrutinib monotherapy, and 14 (8%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil. Deaths occurred in eight (4%) patients given acalabrutinib-obinutuzumab, 12 (7%) patients given acalabrutinib, and 15 (9%) patients given obinutuzumab-chlorambucil.

INTERPRETATION

Acalabrutinib with or without obinutuzumab significantly improved progression-free survival over obinutuzumab-chlorambucil chemoimmunotherapy, providing a chemotherapy-free treatment option with an acceptable side-effect profile that was consistent with previous studies. These data support the use of acalabrutinib in combination with obinutuzumab or alone as a new treatment option for patients with treatment-naive symptomatic chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

FUNDING

Acerta Pharma, a member of the AstraZeneca Group, and R35 CA198183 (to JCB).

Phase 2 study of efgartigimod, a novel FcRn antagonist, in adult patients with primary immune thrombocytopenia

Primary immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) is an acquired autoimmune bleeding disorder, characterized by a low platelet count (<100 × 10⁹/L) in the absence of other causes associated with thrombocytopenia. In most patients, IgG autoantibodies directed against platelet receptors can be detected. They accelerate platelet clearance and destruction, inhibit platelet production, and impair platelet function, resulting in increased risk of bleeding and impaired quality of life. Efgartigimod is a human IgG1 antibody Fc‐fragment, a natural ligand of the neonatal Fc receptor (FcRn), engineered for increased affinity to FcRn, while preserving its characteristic pH‐dependent binding. Efgartigimod blocks FcRn, preventing IgG recycling, and causing targeted IgG degradation. In this Phase 2 study, 38 patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive four weekly intravenous infusions of either placebo (N = 12) or efgartigimod at a dose of 5 mg/kg (N = 13) or 10 mg/kg (N = 13). This short treatment cycle of efgartigimod in patients with ITP, predominantly refractory to previous lines of therapy, was shown to be well tolerated, and demonstrated a favorable safety profile consistent with Phase 1 data. Efgartigimod induced a rapid reduction of total IgG levels (up to 63.7% mean change from baseline), which was associated with clinically relevant increases in platelet counts (46% patients on efgartigimod vs 25% on placebo achieved a platelet count of ≥50 × 10⁹/L on at least two occasions, and 38% vs 0% achieved ≥50 × 10⁹/L for at least 10 cumulative days), and a reduced proportion of patients with bleeding. Taken together, these data warrant further evaluation of FcRn antagonism as a novel therapeutic approach in ITP.

Ropeginterferon alfa-2b versus standard therapy for polycythaemia vera (PROUD-PV and CONTINUATION-PV): a randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial and its extension study

BACKGROUND

The PROUD-PV and CONTINUATION-PV trials aimed to compare the novel monopegylated interferon ropeginterferon alfa-2b with hydroxyurea, the standard therapy for patients with polycythaemia vera, over 3 years of treatment.

METHODS

PROUD-PV and its extension study, CONTINUATION-PV, were phase 3, randomised, controlled, open-label, trials done in 48 clinics in Europe. Patients were eligible if 18 years or older with early stage polycythaemia vera (no history of cytoreductive treatment or less than 3 years of previous hydroxyurea treatment) diagnosed by WHO's 2008 criteria. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to ropeginterferon alfa-2b (subcutaneously every 2 weeks, starting at 100 μg) or hydroxyurea (orally starting at 500 mg/day). After 1 year, patients could opt to enter the extension part of the trial, CONTINUATION-PV. The primary endpoint in PROUD-PV was non-inferiority of ropeginterferon alfa-2b versus hydroxyurea regarding complete haematological response with normal spleen size (longitudinal diameter of ≤12 cm for women and ≤13 cm for men) at 12 months; in CONTINUATION-PV, the coprimary endpoints were complete haematological response with normalisation of spleen size and with improved disease burden (ie, splenomegaly, microvascular disturbances, pruritus, and headache). We present the final results of PROUD-PV and an interim analysis at 36 months of the CONTINUATION-PV study (per statistical analysis plan). Analyses for safety and efficacy were per-protocol. The trials were registered on EudraCT, 2012-005259-18 (PROUD-PV) and 2014-001357-17 (CONTINUATION-PV, which is ongoing).

FINDINGS

Patients were recruited from Sept 17, 2013 to March 13, 2015 with 306 enrolled. 257 patients were randomly assigned, 127 were treated in each group (three patients withdrew consent in the hydroxyurea group), and 171 rolled over to the CONTINUATION-PV trial. Median follow-up was 182·1 weeks (IQR 166·3-201·7) in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b and 164·5 weeks (144·4-169·3) in the standard therapy group. In PROUD-PV, 26 (21%) of 122 patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b group and 34 (28%) of 123 patients in the standard therapy group met the composite primary endpoint of complete haematological response with normal spleen size. In CONTINUATION-PV, complete haematological response with improved disease burden was met in 50 (53%) of 95 patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b group versus 28 (38%) of 74 patients in the hydroxyurea group, p=0·044 at 36 months. Complete haematological response without the spleen criterion in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b group versus standard therapy group were: 53 (43%) of 123 patients versus 57 (46%) of 125 patients, p=0·63 at 12 months (PROUD-PV), and 67 (71%) of 95 patients versus 38 (51%) of 74 patients, p=0·012 at 36 months (CONTINUATION-PV). The most frequently reported grade 3 and grade 4 treatment-related adverse events were increased γ-glutamyltransferase (seven [6%] of 127 patients) and increased alanine aminotransferase (four [3%] of 127 patients) in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b group, and leucopenia (six [5%] of 127 patients) and thrombocytopenia (five [4%] of 127 patients) in the standard therapy group. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in three (2%) of 127 patients in the ropeginterferon alfa-2b group and five (4%) of 127 patients in the hydroxyurea group. One treatment-related death was reported in the standard therapy group (acute leukaemia).

INTERPRETATION

In patients with early polycythaemia vera, who predominantly presented without splenomegaly, ropeginterferon alfa-2b was effective in inducing haematological responses; non-inferiority to hydroxyurea regarding haematological response and normal spleen size was not shown at 12 months. However, response to ropeginterferon alfa-2b continued to increase over time with improved responses compared with hydroxyurea at 36 months. Considering the high and durable haematological and molecular responses and its good tolerability, ropeginterferon alfa-2b offers a valuable and safe long-term treatment option with features distinct from hydroxyurea.

FUNDING

AOP Orphan Pharmaceuticals AG.

Lenalidomide maintenance therapy in previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia (CONTINUUM): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of lenalidomide as maintenance therapy after chemotherapy-based second-line therapy in patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia is unknown. Although kinase inhibitors can improve outcomes for some patients with relapsed and refractory disease, not all patients have access to these novel drugs. In this study, we aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of lenalidomide as maintenance therapy in patients with previously treated chronic lymphocytic leukaemia.

METHODS

This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (CONTINUUM) was done at 111 hospitals, medical centres, and clinics in 21 countries. Patients were eligible if they had chronic lymphocytic leukaemia; were aged 18 years or older; had been treated with two lines of therapy (with at least a partial response after second-line therapy); had received a purine analogue, bendamustine, anti-CD20 antibody, chlorambucil, or alemtuzumab as first-line or second-line treatment; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score of 0-2. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive voice-response system to receive either oral lenalidomide (2·5 mg/day) or matching oral placebo capsules (2·5 mg/day) for 28-day cycles, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Lenalidomide dose escalation (to 5 mg or 10 mg per day) was permitted if the drug was well tolerated. Patients, investigators, and those completing data analyses were masked to treatment allocation. Randomisation was stratified by age, response to second-line therapy, and prognostic factors. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival and overall survival; the primary endpoint was later changed to overall survival after the data cutoff for this analysis. Secondary endpoints were time from randomisation to second disease progression or death (PFS2),³² tumour response (improvement in response and duration of response), safety, and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Efficacy analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00774345, and is closed to accrual, but follow-up is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between Feb 16, 2009 and Sept 29, 2015, 314 patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive either lenalidomide (n=160) or placebo (n=154). With a median follow-up of 31·5 months (IQR 18·9-50·8), there was no significant difference in overall survival between the lenalidomide and the placebo groups (median 70·4 months, 95% CI 57·5-not estimable [NE] vs NE, 95% CI 62·8-NE; hazard ratio [HR] 0·96, 95% CI 0·63-1·48; p=0·86). Progression-free survival was significantly longer in the lenalidomide group (median 33·9 months, 95% CI 25·5-52·5) than in the placebo group (9·2 months, 7·4-13·6; HR 0·40, 95% CI 0·29-0·55; p<0·0001). PFS2 was significantly longer in the lenalidomide group than in the placebo group (median 57·5 months [47·7-NE] vs 32·7 months [26·4-49·0]; HR 0·46, 95% CI 0·29-0·70; p<0·01). Improved responses from baseline were observed in ten (6%) of 160 lenalidomide-treated patients versus four (3%) of 154 placebo-treated patients (p=0·12). Median time to improved response was 12·2 weeks (IQR 7·2-22·5) in the lenalidomide group versus 76·3 weeks (20·2-182·6) in the placebo group. Duration of improved response was not estimable in either group (95% CI 22·9-NE in the lenalidomide group vs NE-NE for placebo). There were no clinically meaningful differences in HRQoL between lenalidomide-treated patients and placebo-treated patients, as measured by FACT-Leu and EQ-5D, during maintenance treatment. In the safety population, the most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included neutropenia (94 [60%] of 157 patients in the lenalidomide group vs 35 [23%] of 154 patients in the placebo group), thrombocytopenia (26 [17%] vs ten [6%]), and diarrhoea (13 [8%] vs one [<1%]). There were five fatal adverse events (three [2%] patients in the lenalidomide group and two [1%] patients in the placebo group).

INTERPRETATION

Lenalidomide might delay time to subsequent therapy and does not adversely affect response to subsequent therapy. Chemoimmunotherapy followed by lenalidomide maintenance could be an effective treatment option for patients with chronic lymphocytic leukaemia who do not have access to kinase inhibitors.

FUNDING

Celgene Corporation.

SIMPLIFY-1: A Phase III Randomized Trial of Momelotinib Versus Ruxolitinib in Janus Kinase Inhibitor-Naïve Patients With Myelofibrosis

Purpose We evaluated the efficacy and safety of momelotinib, a potent and selective Janus kinase 1 and 2 inhibitor (JAKi), compared with ruxolitinib, in JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis. Patients and Methods Patients (N = 432) with high risk or intermediate-2 risk or symptomatic intermediate-1 risk myelofibrosis were randomly assigned to receive 24 weeks of treatment with momelotinib 200 mg once daily or ruxolitinib 20 mg twice a day (or per label), after which all patients could receive open-label momelotinib. The primary end point was a ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume at 24 weeks of therapy. Secondary end points were rates of symptom response and effects on RBC transfusion requirements. Results A ≥ 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 24 was achieved by a similar proportion of patients in both treatment arms: 26.5% of the momelotinib group and 29% of the ruxolitinib group (noninferior; P = .011). A ≥ 50% reduction in the total symptom score was observed in 28.4% and 42.2% of patients who received momelotinib and ruxolitinib, respectively, indicating that noninferiority was not met ( P = .98). Transfusion rate, transfusion independence, and transfusion dependence were improved with momelotinib (all with nominal P ≤ .019). The most common grade ≥ 3 hematologic abnormalities in either group were thrombocytopenia and anemia. Grade ≥ 3 infections occurred in 7% of patients who received momelotinib and 3% of patients who received ruxolitinib. Treatment-emergent peripheral neuropathy occurred in 10% of patients who received momelotinib (all grade ≤ 2) and 5% of patients who received ruxolitinib (all grade ≤ 3). Conclusion In JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis, 24 weeks of momelotinib treatment was noninferior to ruxolitinib for spleen response but not for symptom response. Momelotinib treatment was associated with a reduced transfusion requirement.

A phase 1b/2b multicenter study of oral panobinostat plus azacitidine in adults with MDS, CMML or AML with ⩽30% blasts

Treatment with azacitidine (AZA), a demethylating agent, prolonged overall survival (OS) vs conventional care in patients with higher-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). As median survival with monotherapy is <2 years, novel agents are needed to improve outcomes. This phase 1b/2b trial (n=113) was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of panobinostat (PAN)+AZA (phase 1b) and evaluate the early efficacy and safety of PAN+AZA vs AZA monotherapy (phase 2b) in patients with higher-risk MDS, chronic myelomonocytic leukemia or oligoblastic acute myeloid leukemia with <30% blasts. The MTD was not reached; the RP2D was PAN 30 mg plus AZA 75 mg/m². More patients receiving PAN+AZA achieved a composite complete response ([CR)+morphologic CR with incomplete blood count+bone marrow CR (27.5% (95% CI, 14.6–43.9%)) vs AZA (14.3% (5.4–28.5%)). However, no significant difference was observed in the 1-year OS rate (PAN+AZA, 60% (50–80%); AZA, 70% (50–80%)) or time to progression (PAN+AZA, 70% (40–90%); AZA, 70% (40–80%)). More grade 3/4 adverse events (97.4 vs 81.0%) and on-treatment deaths (13.2 vs 4.8%) occurred with PAN+AZA. Further dose or schedule optimization may improve the risk/benefit profile of this regimen.

Phase 3 trial of momelotinib (MMB) vs ruxolitinib (RUX) in JAK inhibitor (JAKi) naive patients with myelofibrosis (MF)

7000

Background: MMB, an oral JAKi, has been shown in early trials to reduce spleen volume, improve disease associated symptoms (Sx) and improve RBC transfusion (Tx) requirements in patients (pts) with MF. This study was designed to test non-inferiority of MMB vs RUX in splenic volume reduction and Sx amelioration, and superiority in Tx requirement, in JAKi naïve MF pts. Methods: Eligibility: MF, IPSS high risk, Int-2, or symptomatic Int-1; palpable spleen ≥5cm; platelets ≥ 50 K/μl, and no Gr ≥2 peripheral neuropathy (PN). Stratification by Tx dependency and platelets (<100, 100-200 and >200 K/μl). Pts were randomized 1:1 to 24 wks of MMB 200 mg qd + RUX placebo or RUX 20 mg bid (or modified per label) + MMB placebo, after which all pts could receive open label MMB. Assessments: spleen volume by MRI, and pt reported Sx using a daily eDiary of modified MPN-SAF Total Sx Score (TSS). Primary endpoint was splenic response rate (SRR; ≥35% reduction in volume from baseline) at 24 wks. Secondary endpoints, evaluated sequentially at 24 wks, were rates of TSS response (≥50% reduction from baseline), RBC Tx independence (TI), RBC Tx dependence (TD) and of RBC Tx . Results: 175 of 215 (81%) and 201 of 217 (93%) pts randomized to MMB and RUX, respectively, completed the 24 wk DB phase. Efficacy results are shown in Table. Most common Gr ≥3 AEs in the DB phase with MMB were thrombocytopenia (7%) and anemia (6%), and with RUX were anemia (23%), thrombocytopenia (5%) and neutropenia (5%). Gr ≥3 infections occurred in 7% of MMB and 3% of RUX pts. Treatment emergent PN occurred in 22 (10%) of MMB (all Gr ≤2) and 10 (5%) of RUX (9 Gr ≤2, 1 Gr 3) pts in DB phase, none discontinuing study drug for PN. Overall, AEs led to study drug D/C in 13% of MMB and 6% of RUX pts in DB phase. Conclusions: In pts with JAKi naive MF, 24 weeks of MMB is non-inferior to RUX for spleen response but not for symptom response. MMB treatment is associated with a reduced transfusion requirement. NCT01969838. [Table: see text]

Pacritinib versus best available therapy for the treatment of myelofibrosis irrespective of baseline cytopenias (PERSIST-1): an international, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Available therapies for myelofibrosis can exacerbate cytopenias and are not indicated for patients with severe thrombocytopenia. Pacritinib, which inhibits both JAK2 and FLT3, induced spleen responses with limited myelosuppression in phase 1/2 trials. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of pacritinib versus best available therapy in patients with myelofibrosis irrespective of baseline cytopenias.

METHODS

This international, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial (PERSIST-1) was done at 67 sites in 12 countries. Patients with higher-risk myelofibrosis (with no exclusions for baseline anaemia or thrombocytopenia) were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive oral pacritinib 400 mg once daily or best available therapy (BAT) excluding JAK2 inhibitors until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Randomisation was stratified by risk category, platelet count, and region. Treatment assignments were known to investigators, site personnel, patients, clinical monitors, and pharmacovigilance personnel. The primary endpoint was spleen volume reduction (SVR) of 35% or more from baseline to week 24 in the intention-to-treat population as assessed by blinded, centrally reviewed MRI or CT. We did safety analyses in all randomised patients who received either treatment. Here we present the final data. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01773187.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 8, 2013, and Aug 1, 2014, 327 patients were randomly assigned to pacritinib (n=220) or BAT (n=107). Median follow-up was 23·2 months (IQR 14·8-28·7). At week 24, the primary endpoint of SVR of 35% or more was achieved by 42 (19%) patients in the pacritinib group versus five (5%) patients in the BAT group (p=0·0003). 90 patients in the BAT group crossed over to receive pacritinib at a median of 6·3 months (IQR 5·8-6·7). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events through week 24 were anaemia (n=37 [17%]), thrombocytopenia (n=26 [12%]), and diarrhoea (n=11 [5%]) in the pacritinib group, and anaemia (n=16 [15%]), thrombocytopenia (n=12 [11%]), dyspnoea (n=3 [3%]), and hypotension (n=3 [3%]) in the BAT group. The most common serious adverse events that occurred through week 24 were anaemia (10 [5%]), cardiac failure (5 [2%]), pyrexia (4 [2%]), and pneumonia (4 [2%]) with pacritinib, and anaemia (5 [5%]), sepsis (2 [2%]), and dyspnoea (2 [2%]) with BAT. Deaths due to adverse events were observed in 27 (12%) patients in the pacritinib group and 14 (13%) patients in the BAT group throughout the duration of the study.

INTERPRETATION

Pacritinib therapy was well tolerated and induced significant and sustained SVR and symptom reduction, even in patients with severe baseline cytopenias. Pacritinib could be a treatment option for patients with myelofibrosis, including those with baseline cytopenias for whom options are particularly limited.

FUNDING

CTI BioPharma Corp.

Anagrelide reduces thrombotic risk in essential thrombocythaemia vs. hydroxyurea plus aspirin

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the reduction in thrombotic events (TE) in patients with essential thrombocythaemia (ET) treated with anagrelide versus hydroxyurea + aspirin (HU + ASA).

METHODS

A questionnaire was developed using 2008 WHO diagnostic criteria, and thrombotic risk factors were stratified according to Landolfi criteria. Through questionnaire completion, clinicians at Hungarian haematological centres entered data into the Hungarian MPN Registry on patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms. Based on ET registry data, TEs in anagrelide-treated patients (n = 139) were compared with HU + ASA-treated patients (n = 141).

RESULTS

Patients were followed up for (median) 6 yr. TEs were reported in significantly fewer anagrelide-treated patients versus HU + ASA (15.1% versus 49.6%; P < 0.001). Numbers of major arterial and major venous events were similar between the groups, although there were over fivefold more minor arterial and minor venous events in the HU + ASA group (P < 0.001). While median age at diagnosis was older and length of follow-up shorter in the HU + ASA group (P < 0.05), this did not influence TE incidence; medication and TE before diagnosis only influenced TE incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

Anagrelide significantly decreased the number of patients experiencing minor arterial and minor venous TEs versus HU + ASA over 6 yr. Risk of TE after diagnosis was significantly increased if the patient had TE before diagnosis.

Results of the PERSIST-1 phase III study of pacritinib (PAC) versus best available therapy (BAT) in primary myelofibrosis (PMF), post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (PPV-MF), or post-essential thrombocythemia-myelofibrosis (PET-MF)

LBA7006

Background: PAC is a potent JAK2 inhibitor without significant JAK1 inhibition with minimal myelosuppression in early-phase studies in MF. Methods: The efficacy and safety of daily oral PAC was compared to BAT (2:1 randomization stratified for risk and platelet count). The 10 endpoint was the proportion of ITT patients (pts) achieving ≥ 35% spleen volume reduction (SVR) at week (wk) 24 by centrally reviewed MRI or CT. Secondary endpoints included the proportion achieving ≥ 50% reduction in total symptom score (TSS) at wk 24 using the MPN Symptom Assessment Form. Results: Patients:327 were enrolled (PAC:220, BAT:107), 62% with 10 MF. Median time from diagnosis was 1.12 years (PAC 0.99, BAT 1.60): 32% and 15% had a platelet counts < 100,000/µL or <50,000/ µL; 75% were JAK2V617F positive. Efficacy: The median duration of treatment was 16.2 months PAC and 5.9 months BAT. Sixty-two percent of BAT patients received active disease directed therapy. The SVR rates at week 24 were 19.1% for PAC vs. 4.7% for BAT (p=0.0003) in ITT and 25% vs. 5.9% (p=0.0001) in the evaluable population. 79% of BAT patients crossed over to PAC; 21% had achieved a >35% reduction in spleen volume at data cutoff. TSS composite V1 + V2 response rates were 24.5%for PAC vs. 6.5% for BAT (p<0.0001) by ITT, and were 40.9% vs. 9.9% in evaluable pts (p<0.0001). Efficacy with baseline cytopenias: In pts with <100,000 and <50,000 platelets/μ/L, the SVR rates were 16.7% for PAC vs. 0% for BAT (p=0.009), and 22.9% vs. 0% (p=0.045) by ITT and 23.5% vs. 0% (p=0.007) and 33.3% vs. 0% (p=0.037) in evaluable pts. In RBC transfusion dependent pts, 25.7% of PAC pts became RBC independent vs. 0% of BAT pts (p=0.043). Safety: The most common adverse events (AE) for PAC were diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting; (grade 3 were <5%, <1%, <1% respectively). Hematologic AEs were similar between PAC and BAT. Conclusions: This study demonstrated PAC was well tolerated and induced significant and sustained SVR and symptom control even in patients with severe thrombocytopenia. PAC therapy resulted in RBC transfusion independence in a significant proportion of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01773187.