Life after ruxolitinib: Reasons for discontinuation, impact of disease phase, and outcomes in 218 patients with myelofibrosis

A phase 2 study of itacitinib alone or in combination with low-dose ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND

The Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib has demonstrated efficacy/safety in patients with myelofibrosis; however, not all patients experience optimal and/or stable response, in part owing to dose-limiting toxicities. This phase 2 study evaluated itacitinib (JAK1-selective inhibitor) efficacy/safety alone or combined with low-dose ruxolitinib.

METHODS

Cohort A received itacitinib 200 mg once daily (QD) plus ruxolitinib at a previous stable dose (≤15 mg total daily dose). Cohort B (previously ruxolitinib-treated) received itacitinib 600 mg QD alone. The primary endpoint was baseline-to-week 24 spleen volume reduction (SVR).

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients were enrolled (median age, 71.0 years; intermediate-1/-2 risk, 73.9 %; Cohort A, n = 13; Cohort B, n = 10). Mean (standard deviation) percentage SVR from baseline was +6.9 % (27.5 %) and -3.0 % (34.7 %) in Cohorts A and B at week 24 (primary endpoint), and -1.6 % (14.7 %) and -24.6 % (21.7 %) in Cohorts A and B at week 12. SVR from baseline was achieved by 5 and 3 patients in Cohorts A and B at week 24, and by 9 and 7 patients in Cohorts A and B at week 12. Most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were anemia, diarrhea, and fatigue (each n = 8); most common grade ≥ 3 TEAEs were anemia (n = 6), thrombocytopenia (n = 5), fatigue (n = 3), and diarrhea (n = 2).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, 8 of 23 patients enrolled achieved SVR at week 24; larger average changes in SVR at week 12 were observed for itacitinib monotherapy vs. the combination. No unexpected safety signals were observed.

Targeted Therapies in Myelofibrosis: Present Landscape, Ongoing Studies, and Future Perspectives

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm that is accompanied by driver JAK2, CALR, or MPL mutations in more than 90% of cases, leading to constitutive activation of the JAK-STAT pathway. MF is a multifaceted disease characterized by trilineage myeloid proliferation with prominent megakaryocyte atypia and bone marrow fibrosis, as well as splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, ineffective erythropoiesis, extramedullary hematopoiesis, and a risk of leukemic progression and shortened survival. Therapy can range from observation alone in lower-risk and asymptomatic patients to allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation, which is the only potentially curative treatment capable of prolonging survival, although burdened by significant morbidity and mortality. The discovery of the JAK2 V617F mutation prompted the development of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) including the first-in-class JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib and subsequent approval of fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib. The latter has shown erythropoietic benefits by suppressing hepcidin expression via activin A receptor type 1 (ACVR1) inhibition, as well as reducing splenomegaly and symptoms. However, the current JAKi behave as anti-inflammatory drugs without a major impact on survival or disease progression. A better understanding of the genetics, mechanisms of fibrosis, cytopenia, and the role of inflammatory cytokines has led to the development of numerous therapeutic agents that target epigenetic regulation, signaling, telomerase, cell cycle, and apoptosis, nuclear export, and pro-fibrotic cytokines. Selective JAK2 V617F inhibitors and targeting of mutant CALR by immunotherapy are the most intriguing and promising approaches. This review focuses on approved and experimental treatments for MF, highlighting their biological background.

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

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 noncurative, 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 pretransplant 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.

Different inflammatory, fibrotic, and immunological signatures between pre-fibrotic and overt primary myelofibrosis

Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) is a myeloid proliferative neoplasm (MPN) characterized by bone marrow fibrosis. Pre-fibrotic PMF (pre-PMF) progresses to overt PMF. Megakaryocytes play a primary role in PMF; however, the functions of megakaryocyte subsets and those of other hematopoietic cells during PMF progression remain unclear. We, therefore, analyzed bone marrow aspirates in cases of pre-PMF, overt PMF, and other MPN using single-cell RNA sequencing. We identified 14 cell types with subsets, including hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells (HSPC) and megakaryocytes. HSPC in overt PMF were megakaryocyte-biased and inflammation/fibrosis-enriched. Among megakaryocytes, the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT)-enriched subset was abruptly increased in overt PMF. Megakaryocytes in non-fibrotic/non-PMF MPN were megakaryocyte differentiation-enriched, whereas those in fibrotic/non-PMF MPN were inflammation/fibrosis-enriched. Overall, the inflammation/fibrosis signatures of the HSPC, megakaryocyte, and CD14+ monocyte subsets increased from pre-PMF to overt PMF. Cytotoxic and dysfunctional scores also increased in T and NK cells. Clinically, megakaryocyte and HSPC subsets with high inflammation/fibrosis signatures were frequent in the patients with peripheral blood blasts ≥1%. Single-cell RNA-sequencing predicted higher cellular communication of megakaryocyte differentiation, inflammation/fibrosis, immunological effector/dysfunction, and tumor-associated signaling in overt PMF than in pre-PMF. However, no decisive subset emerged during PMF progression. Our study demonstrated that HSPC, monocytes, and lymphoid cells contribute to the progression of PMF, and subset specificity existed regarding inflammation/fibrosis and immunological dysfunction. PMF progression may depend on alterations of multiple cell types, and EMT-enriched megakaryocytes may be potential targets for diagnosing and treating the progression.

Real-world treatment patterns and health care resource use for patients with myelofibrosis: results from the METER study

ABSTRACT

Myelofibrosis (MF), a myeloproliferative neoplasm, was most commonly treated with hydroxyurea (HU) before approval of ruxolitinib (RUX), now the standard of care. Factors that influence real-world MF treatment patterns are not well understood. The METER study was a multi-country, retrospective chart review of MF treatment patterns, treatment effectiveness, and health care resource utilization. Of 997 eligible patients, 65.9% had primary MF, and 11.7% were transfusion dependent. Median time from diagnosis to the start of initial treatment (index date) was 29 days (interquartile range [IQR], 1-140). RUX was the most common first-line (1L) therapy (49.0%), followed by HU (40.2%); 48.5% of patients remained on 1L therapy through week 156. Seventy-seven patients underwent allogeneic stem cell transplantation; transplantation was uncommon at 1L, increasing from 2.2% at week 24 to 11.0% at week 156 in patients ≤70 years of age. Median overall survival was 79.1 months (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 70.8 to not estimable [NE]) in all patients, 142.3 months (95% CI, 74.1 to NE) for non-RUX patients, 77.6 months (95% CI, 64.2-85.9) for patients on RUX 1L therapy, and 72.6 months (95% CI, 62.0 to NE) for RUX 2L+ patients. Of patients who experienced ≥1 corresponding event, the median hospital length of stay (LoS; n = 520), intensive care unit LoS (n = 71), and number of transfusions (n = 375) were 16 days (IQR, 7-37), 5 days (IQR, 2-13), and 12 (IQR, 4-26), respectively. Despite improvements, there were numerous hospitalization and transfusion events among these patients in routine practice. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT05444972.

Disease Phenotype Significantly Influences the Outcome After Discontinuation of Ruxolitinib in Chronic Phase Myelofibrosis

INTRODUCTION

In patients with myelofibrosis (MF), overall survival (OS) after ruxolitinib discontinuation is poor, with leukemic transformation, clonal evolution and thrombocytopenia as the main factors worsening prognosis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

To assess the impact of disease phenotype on outcome after ruxolitinib discontinuation in chronic phase patients, we performed a sub-analysis of the "RUX-MF" study (NCT06516406), which now includes 1055 MF patients who received ruxolitinib in a real-life context.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up of 3.3 years, 397 patients discontinued ruxolitinib therapy while in chronic phase. At treatment end, 208 patients (52.4%) had a severely cytopenic phenotype (defined as platelets < 100 × 109/L and/or hemoglobin < 8 g/dL); among the remaining myeloproliferative 189 patients, 97 had no cytopenia (51.3%) and 92 (48.7%) had mild anemia only (hemoglobin between 8 and 10 g/dL). Overall, 175 patients (44.1%) had a large splenomegaly (palpable at ≥ 10 cm below costal margin). After ruxolitinib discontinuation, 3-year OS was 33.4% in severely cytopenic and 54.4% in myeloproliferative patients (P < .001); this was confirmed after adjustment for risk categories. Noncytopenic and mildly anemic patients had comparable OS (P = .73). Patients with large splenomegaly had significantly poorer OS compared to nonsplenomegalic patients (OS: 33.5% vs. 51.6% P = .01). Large splenomegaly confirmed its negative prognostic impact on OS of patients with myeloproliferative MF (60.7% vs. 44.5%, P = .05). In patients with severe cytopenia, the presence of a large splenomegaly did not influence OS (41.7% vs. 26.1%, P = .26).

CONCLUSIONS

Cytopenic phenotype and large splenomegaly in myeloproliferative MF are key prognostic determinants of outcome after ruxolitinib discontinuation.

Treatment patterns and healthcare resource utilization in ruxolitinib-treated patients with myelofibrosis with and without anemia: a real-world analysis

Anemia affects many patients with myelofibrosis and is associated with poor prognosis. The Janus kinase inhibitor ruxolitinib is often used in myelofibrosis but may cause or worsen anemia. Using healthcare claims data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database, this retrospective analysis evaluated healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), healthcare costs, and treatment patterns in ruxolitinib-treated patients with myelofibrosis stratified by anemia diagnosis prior to ruxolitinib initiation. Of 11,499 patients diagnosed with myelofibrosis between January 2011 and December 2022, 481 had ≥ 1 ruxolitinib claim on or after the myelofibrosis diagnosis date and were included in this analysis. Mean follow-up was 2.0 years. At baseline, anemic patients (n = 257) were older (mean age, 60.2 vs. 56.8 years; P < 0.001) and had a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index (1.0 vs. 0.5; P < 0.001) than nonanemic patients (n = 224). During follow-up, anemic patients exhibited higher median annual all-cause HCRU (inpatient admissions, 0.3 vs. 0.0 [P < 0.001]; outpatient visits, 40.0 vs. 20.0 [P < 0.001]; emergency department visits, 0.4 vs. 0.0 [P < 0.010]) and also had numerically higher median annual all-cause total healthcare costs ($198,491 vs. $170,419; P = 0.549) and medical costs ($44,830 vs. $12,017; P = 0.638) but significantly lower median annual total pharmacy costs ($129,381 vs. $136,686; P < 0.050), compared with nonanemic patients. Ruxolitinib discontinuation rates were higher and median time to discontinuation was approximately 1 year earlier in anemic patients (14.1 vs. 23.8 months; P < 0.010). In conclusion, patients with myelofibrosis and baseline anemia who are treated with ruxolitinib may be an HCRU-intensive population, suggesting a potential need for alternative treatments that reduce their medical resource burden.

Targeting lysine acetylation readers and writers

Lysine acetylation is a major post-translational modification in histones and other proteins that is catalysed by the 'writer' lysine acetyltransferases (KATs) and mediates interactions with bromodomains (BrDs) and other 'reader' proteins. KATs and BrDs play key roles in regulating gene expression, cell growth, chromatin structure, and epigenetics and are often dysregulated in disease states, including cancer. There have been accelerating efforts to identify potent and selective small molecules that can target individual KATs and BrDs with the goal of developing new therapeutics, and some of these agents are in clinical trials. Here, we summarize the different families of KATs and BrDs, discuss their functions and structures, and highlight key advances in the design and development of chemical agents that show promise in blocking the action of these chromatin proteins for disease treatment.

Impact of calreticulin mutations on treatment and survival outcomes in myelofibrosis during ruxolitinib therapy

Calreticulin (CALR) mutations are detected in around 20% of patients with primary and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (MF). Regardless of driver mutations, patients with splenomegaly and symptoms are generally treated with JAK2-inhibitors, most commonly ruxolitinib. Recently, new therapies specifically targeting the CALR mutant clone have entered clinical investigation. To collect information on efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in CALR-mutated patients, we report a sub-analysis of the "RUX-MF" (NCT06516406) study, comprising 135 CALR-mutated and 786 JAK2-mutated ruxolitinib-treated patients. Compared to JAK2-mutated patients, CALR-mutated patients started ruxolitinib with a more severe disease (higher peripheral blast counts, lower hemoglobin levels and worse marrow fibrosis) and after a longer median time from diagnosis (2.6 versus 0.7 years, p < 0.001). At 6 months, spleen responses were numerically inferior in CALR-mutated patients, who also had significantly lower rates of symptom responses (56.1% versus 66.7%, p = 0.04).

Clinical outcomes of ruxolitinib treatment in 595 intermediate-1 risk patients with myelofibrosis: The RUX-MF Real-World Study

BACKGROUND

Ruxolitinib (RUX) is a JAK1/2 inhibitor approved for the therapy of myelofibrosis (MF) based on clinical trials including only intermediate2-high risk (INT2/HIGH) patients. However, RUX is commonly used in intermediate-1 (INT1) patients, with scarce information on responses and outcome.

METHODS

The authors investigated the benefit of RUX in 1055 MF patients, included in the "RUX-MF" retrospective study.

RESULTS

At baseline (BL), 595 (56.2%) patients were at INT1-risk according to DIPSS (PMF) or MYSEC-PM (SMF). The spleen was palpable at <5 cm, between 5 and 10 cm, and >10 cm below costal margin in 5.9%, 47.4%, and 39.7% of patients, respectively; 300 (54.1%) were highly symptomatic (total symptom score ≥20). High-molecular-risk (HMR) mutations (IDH1/2, ASXL-1, SRSF2, EZH2, U2AF1Q157) were detected in 77/167 patients. A total of 101 (19.2%) patients had ≥1 cytopenia (Hb < 10 g/dL: n.36; PLT <100 x 109/L: n = 43; white blood cells <4 x 109/L: n = 40). After 6 months on RUX, IWG-MRT-defined spleen and symptoms response rates were 26.8% and 67.9%, respectively. In univariate analysis, predictors of SR at 6 months were no HMR mutations odds ratio [OR], 2.0, p = .05], no cytopenia (OR, 2.10; p = .01), and blasts <1% (OR, 1.91; p = .01). In multivariate analysis, absence of HMR maintained a significant association (OR, 2.1 [1.12-3.76]; p = .01).

CONCLUSIONS

In INT1 patients, responses were more frequent and durable, whereas toxicity rates were lower compared to INT2/high-risk patients. Presence of HMR mutations, cytopenia, and peripheral blasts identified less-responsive INT1 patients, who may benefit for alternative therapeutic strategies.

Would you like to take some more ruxolitinib after your fedratinib?

In Europe, ruxolitinib and fedratinib are the only JAK2 inhibitors available in local pharmacies. According to trial data, myelofibrosis patients should mostly receive ruxolitinib as first-line treatment and fedratinib in case of failure or intolerance (depending on their profile). Is it possible to reverse the choice of these drugs? Commentary on: Palandri et al. Ruxolitinib after Fedratinib failure in patients with myelofibrosis: a real-world case series. Br J Haematol 2024; 205:1605-1609.

Prognostic and Predictive Models in Myelofibrosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Myelofibrosis (MF) includes prefibrotic primary MF (pre-PMF), overt-PMF and secondary MF (SMF). Median overall survival (OS) of pre-PMF, overt-PMF and SMF patients is around 14 years, seven and nine years, respectively. Main causes of mortality are non-clonal progression and transformation into blast phase.

RECENT FINDINGS

Discoveries on the impact of the biological architecture on OS have led to the design of integrated scores to predict survival in PMF. For SMF, OS estimates should be calculated by the specific MYSEC-PM (MYelofibrosis SECondary-prognostic model). Information on the prognostic role of the molecular landscape in SMF is accumulating. Crucial treatment decisions for MF patients could be now supported by multivariable predictive algorithms. OS should become a relevant endpoint of clinical trials. Prognostic models guide prediction of OS and treatment planning in MF, therefore, their timely application is critical in the personalized approach of MF patients.

Efficacy and safety of fedratinib in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib (FREEDOM2): results from a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Most patients with myelofibrosis develop ruxolitinib intolerance or disease that is relapsed or refractory, and survival rates after ruxolitinib discontinuation are poor. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fedratinib versus best available therapy (BAT) in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib.

METHODS

FREEDOM2 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in 86 clinics in 16 countries, in which patients aged at least 18 years with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis that was relapsed or refractory or intolerant to ruxolitinib with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 were stratified by spleen size by palpation, platelet count, and previous ruxolitinib treatment, and randomly assigned 2:1 by interactive response technology to receive fedratinib 400 mg per day (4 × 100 mg capsules orally once daily, open-label) or BAT. Patients received prophylactic antiemetics and thiamine supplementation, and symptomatic antidiarrhoeals as required. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients reaching spleen volume reduction (SVR) of at least 35% (SVR35) at end of cycle 6 in the intention-to-treat population. This manuscript reports the primary analysis of the trial; follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03952039.

FINDINGS

Between Sept 9, 2019 and June 24, 2022, of 316 patients screened, 201 were randomly assigned and treated (134 to fedratinib, 67 to BAT [including 52 receiving ruxolitinib]); 46 patients from the BAT group crossed over to fedratinib. Approximately half of enrolled patients were male (fedratinib 75 [56%] of 134; BAT 30 [45%] of 67) and most were White (fedratinib 106 [79%] of 134; BAT 58 [87%] of 67). At data cutoff (Dec 27, 2022), median survival follow-up was 64·5 weeks (IQR 37·9-104·9). SVR35 at end of cycle 6 was seen in 48 (36%) of 134 patients receiving fedratinib versus four (6%) of 67 patients receiving BAT (30% difference; 95% CI 20-39; one-sided p-value <0·0001). During the first six cycles 53 (40%) of 134 patients in the fedratinib group and 8 (12%) of 67 patients in the BAT group had grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events, most frequently anaemia (fedratinib 12 [9%] of 134; BAT 6 [9%] of 67) and thrombocytopenia (fedratinib 16 [12%] of 134; BAT 2 [3%] of 67); one patient in the fedratinib group died from acute kidney injury suspected to be related to study drug (no treatment-related deaths in the BAT group). Gastrointestinal adverse events occurred more frequently in the fedratinib group compared with the BAT group, but were mostly grade 1-2 in severity and more frequent in early cycles, and were less frequent than in prior clinical trials. A total of 28 (21%) of 134 patients in the fedratinib group and 3 (4%) of 67 patients in the BAT group had thiamine levels below lower limit of normal per central laboratory assessment, with only one case of low thiamine in the fedratinib arm after the introduction of prophylactic thiamine supplementation.

INTERPRETATION

Findings from FREEDOM2 support fedratinib as a second-line Janus kinase inhibitor option to reduce spleen size after ruxolitinib failure or intolerance in patients with myelofibrosis, and shows effective strategies for management of gastrointestinal adverse events and low thiamine concentrations through prophylaxis, monitoring, and treatment.

FUNDING

Bristol Myers Squibb.

Emerging drug profile: JAK inhibitors

Dysregulated JAK/STAT hyperactivity is essential to the pathogenesis of myelofibrosis, and JAK inhibitors are the first-line treatment option for many patients. There are four FDA-approved JAK inhibitors for patients with myelofibrosis. Single-agent JAK inhibition can improve splenomegaly, symptom burden, cytopenias, and possibly survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Despite their efficacy, JAK inhibitors produce variable or short-lived responses, in part due to the large network of cooperating signaling pathways and downstream targets of JAK/STAT, which mediates upfront or acquired resistance to JAK inhibitors. Synergistic inhibition of JAK/STAT accessory pathways can increase the rates and duration of response for patients with myelofibrosis. Two recently reported, placebo-controlled phase III trials of novel agents added to JAK inhibition met their primary endpoint, and additional late-stage studies are ongoing. This paper will review role of dysregulated JAK/STAT signaling, biological plausible additional therapeutic targets and the recent advancements in combination strategies with JAK inhibitors for myelofibrosis.

Cavitary lung lesions caused by Pneumocystis jirovecii in a patient with myelofibrosis on ruxolitinib

We report a rare case of a patient with Janus kinase 2-positive myelofibrosis on ruxolitinib, presenting with indolent pneumonia and cavitary lung lesions. Initial transthoracic biopsy was non-specific, but thoracoscopic biopsy revealed necrotising granulomatous disease caused by Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia (PJP). The patient, initially treated with trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, was switched to atovaquone due to gastrointestinal intolerance. Given the patient's immunosuppression and extensive cavitary lesions, an extended course of atovaquone was administered, guided by serial imaging, resulting in clinical and radiological improvement. Unfortunately, the patient later passed away from a severe SARS-CoV-2 infection before complete radiographic resolution was observed. This case highlights the importance of recognising atypical PJP presentations causing granulomatous disease in immunosuppressed patients. While rare, documenting such cases may improve diagnosis using less invasive methods and help determine optimal treatment durations for resolution of these atypical infections.

Red cell distribution width and prognosis in myelofibrosis patients treated with ruxolitinib

We evaluated RDW in a single-center series of 61 consecutive patients with primary and secondary MF at diagnosis and during treatment with ruxolitinib (RUX) and examined any possible prognostic impact. Elevated RDW values were present in all but 4 patients at diagnosis with a median RDW of 18.9%. RDW was higher in subjects with palpable splenomegaly (p = 0.02), higher ferritin, as well as among those cases who did not receive any cytoreduction before RUX (p = 0.04). Interestingly, higher RDW at diagnosis also correlated with a shorter time from MF diagnosis to RUX start (-4.1 months per one RDW unit; p = 0.03). We observed a modest increase (< 1%) in RDW during the first 6 months of RUX treatment. In a multivariable random-intercept model that considered all time points and contained the covariates time and RUX dose, we also observed a clear decrease in RDW with increasing hemoglobin (Hb) during RUX (slope: -0.4% per g/dL of Hb; p < 0.001). The median RDW at diagnosis of 18.9% was used as a cut-off to identify two subgroups of patients [Group 1: RDW 19.0-25.7%; Group 2: RDW 13.1-18.7%], showing a difference in mortality [Group 1 vs. 2: crude HR 2.88; p = 0.01]. Using continuous RDW at diagnosis, the crude HR was 1.21 per RDW unit (p = 0.002). In a Cox model adjusted for gender, age and Hb at diagnosis, the HR was 1.13 per RDW unit (p = 0.07). RDW may have prognostic significance at MF diagnosis and during RUX, helping in the rapid detection of patients with poor prognosis.

Momelotinib vs. ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis patient subgroups by baseline hemoglobin levels in the SIMPLIFY-1 trial

A key hallmark of myelofibrosis is anemia, which ranges from mild to severe based on hemoglobin levels. To more clearly define outcomes with the Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2/activin A receptor type 1 inhibitor momelotinib by anemia severity, we performed a descriptive post hoc exploratory analysis of the double-blind, randomized, phase 3 SIMPLIFY-1 study (NCT01969838; N = 432, JAK inhibitor naive, momelotinib vs. ruxolitinib); subgroups were defined by baseline hemoglobin: <10 (moderate/severe), ≥10 to <12 (mild), or ≥12 g/dL (nonanemic). Spleen and symptom results were generally consistent with those previously reported for the intent-to-treat population. In anemic subgroups, momelotinib was associated with higher rates of transfusion independence and reduced/stable transfusion intensity vs. ruxolitinib. No new or unexpected safety signals were identified. Overall, momelotinib provides spleen, symptom, and anemia benefits to JAK inhibitor-naive patients with myelofibrosis regardless of baseline hemoglobin level, and greater anemia-related benefits vs. ruxolitinib in patients with hemoglobin <12 g/dL.

Advances with janus kinase inhibitors for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms: an update of the literature

INTRODUCTION

The hallmark discovery of hyperactivation of the janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway was a sentinel moment in the history of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). This finding paved the way for the development of JAK inhibitors, which now represent the foundation of myelofibrosis therapy. With four JAK inhibitors now approved for myelofibrosis, awareness of their clinical efficacy and safety data and recognition of their unique pharmacologic attributes are of critical importance. Additionally, ruxolitinib represents an integral part of the therapeutic arsenal for polycythemia vera.

AREAS COVERED

This review provides a broad overview of the published literature supporting JAK inhibitor therapy for MPNs. Primarily focusing on myelofibrosis, each of the four available JAK inhibitors is reviewed in detail, including pharmacology, efficacy, and safety data. Failure of JAK inhibitors and future directions in JAK inhibitor therapy are also discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

JAK inhibitors revolutionized the treatment of MPNs and have dramatically improved patient outcomes. However, data informing selection between currently available JAK inhibitors is limited. These agents are not curative and eventually fail most patients with myelofibrosis. Combining JAK inhibitors with novel targeted agents appears to be the most promising path to further improve outcomes.

Myelofibrosis and allogeneic transplantation: critical points and challenges

New available drugs allow better control of systemic symptoms associated with myelofibrosis (MF) and splenomegaly but they do not modify the natural history of progressive and poor prognosis disease. Thus, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is still considered the only available curative treatment for patients with MF. Despite the increasing number of procedures worldwide in recent years, HSCT for MF patients remains challenging. An increasingly complex network of the patient, disease, and transplant-related factors should be considered to understand the need for and the benefits of the procedure. Unfortunately, prospective trials are often lacking in this setting, making an evidence-based decision process particularly arduous. In the present review, we will analyze the main controversial points of allogeneic transplantation in MF, that is, the development of more sophisticated models for the identification of eligible patients; the need for tools offering a more precise definition of expected outcomes combining comorbidity assessment and factors related to the procedure; the decision-making process about the best transplantation time; the evaluation of the most appropriate platform for curative treatment; the impact of splenomegaly; and splenectomy on outcomes.

Incidence of blast phase in myelofibrosis patients according to anemia severity at ruxolitinib start and during therapy

BACKGROUND

Anemia is frequently present in patients with myelofibrosis (MF), and it may be exacerbated by treatment with the JAK2-inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX). Recently, a relevant blast phase (BP) incidence has been reported in anemic MF patients unexposed to RUX.

METHODS

The authors investigated the incidence of BP in 886 RUX-treated MF patients, included in the "RUX-MF" retrospective study.

RESULTS

The BP incidence rate ratio (IRR) was 3.74 per 100 patient-years (3.74 %p-y). At therapy start, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events grade 3-4 anemia (hemoglobin [Hb] <8 g/dL) and severe sex/severity-adjusted anemia (Hb <8/<9 g/dL in women/men) were present in 22.5% and 25% patients, respectively. IRR of BP was 2.34 in patients with no baseline anemia and reached respectively 4.22, 4.89, and 4.93 %p-y in patients with grade 1, 2, and 3-4 anemia. Considering the sex/severity-adjusted Hb thresholds, IRR of BP was 2.85, 4.97, and 4.89 %p-y in patients with mild/no anemia, moderate, and severe anemia. Transfusion-dependent patients had the highest IRR (5.03 %p-y). Progression-free survival at 5 years was 70%, 52%, 43%, and 27% in patients with no, grade 1, 2, and 3-4 anemia, respectively (p < .001). At 6 months, 260 of 289 patients with no baseline anemia were receiving ruxolitinib, and 9.2% had developed a grade 3-4 anemia. By 6-month landmark analysis, BP-free survival was significantly worse in patients acquiring grade 3-4 anemia (69.3% vs. 88.1% at 5 years, p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights that anemia correlates with an increased risk of evolution into BP, both when present at baseline and when acquired during RUX monotherapy. Innovative anemia therapies and disease-modifying agents are warranted in these patients.

Advances in pharmacotherapy for myelofibrosis: what is the current state of play?

INTRODUCTION

The introduction of the first JAK inhibitor (JAKi) ruxolitinib 10 years ago represented a pivotal advancement in myelofibrosis (MF) treatment, mostly in terms of spleen and symptoms response. Nowadays three more JAKi, fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib, are available for both ruxolitinib-resistant and naïve patients. Moreover, many drugs are currently being investigated, both alone and in combination with JAKi.

AREAS COVERED

In this review we discuss the long-term data of ruxolitinib and more recent evidence coming from clinical trials of fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib, used as first- or second-line MF therapy. More, focus is set on data from non-JAKi drugs, such as the quite extensively studied BET-inhibitors (pelabresib) and BCL-inhibitors (navitoclax), novel target therapies, and drugs aimed to improve anemia, still representing a major determinant of reduced survival in MF.

EXPERT OPINION

It's now evident that JAKi monotherapy, though clinically effective, is rarely able to change MF natural history; novel drugs are promising but long-term data are inevitably lacking. We feel that soon MF treatment will require clinicians to select the most appropriate JAKi inhibitor, based on patient characteristics, associating either front-line or in case of early suboptimal response, non-JAKi drugs with the aim to pursue disease modification.

Development of Resistance to Type II JAK2 Inhibitors in MPN Depends on AXL Kinase and Is Targetable

PURPOSE

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) dysregulate JAK2 signaling. Because clinical JAK2 inhibitors have limited disease-modifying effects, type II JAK2 inhibitors such as CHZ868 stabilizing inactive JAK2 and reducing MPN clones, gain interest. We studied whether MPN cells escape from type ll inhibition.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

MPN cells were continuously exposed to CHZ868. We used phosphoproteomic analyses and ATAC/RNA sequencing to characterize acquired resistance to type II JAK2 inhibition, and targeted candidate mediators in MPN cells and mice.

RESULTS

MPN cells showed increased IC50 and reduced apoptosis upon CHZ868 reflecting acquired resistance to JAK2 inhibition. Among >2,500 differential phospho-sites, MAPK pathway activation was most prominent, while JAK2-STAT3/5 remained suppressed. Altered histone occupancy promoting AP-1/GATA binding motif exposure associated with upregulated AXL kinase and enriched RAS target gene profiles. AXL knockdown resensitized MPN cells and combined JAK2/AXL inhibition using bemcentinib or gilteritinib reduced IC50 to levels of sensitive cells. While resistant cells induced tumor growth in NOD/SCID gamma mice despite JAK2 inhibition, JAK2/AXL inhibition largely prevented tumor progression. Because inhibitors of MAPK pathway kinases such as MEK are clinically used in other malignancies, we evaluated JAK2/MAPK inhibition with trametinib to interfere with AXL/MAPK-induced resistance. Tumor growth was halted similarly to JAK2/AXL inhibition and in a systemic cell line-derived mouse model, marrow infiltration was decreased supporting dependency on AXL/MAPK.

CONCLUSIONS

We report on a novel mechanism of AXL/MAPK-driven escape from type II JAK2 inhibition, which is targetable at different nodes. This highlights AXL as mediator of acquired resistance warranting inhibition to enhance sustainability of JAK2 inhibition in MPN.

Molecular Genetic Profile of Myelofibrosis: Implications in the Diagnosis, Prognosis, and Treatment Advancements

Myelofibrosis (MF) is an essential element of primary myelofibrosis, whereas secondary MF may develop in the advanced stages of other myeloid neoplasms, especially polycythemia vera and essential thrombocythemia. Over the last two decades, advances in molecular diagnostic techniques, particularly the integration of next-generation sequencing in clinical laboratories, have revolutionized the diagnosis, classification, and clinical decision making of myelofibrosis. Driver mutations involving JAK2, CALR, and MPL induce hyperactivity in the JAK-STAT signaling pathway, which plays a central role in cell survival and proliferation. Approximately 80% of myelofibrosis cases harbor additional mutations, frequently in the genes responsible for epigenetic regulation and RNA splicing. Detecting these mutations is crucial for diagnosing myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), especially in cases where no mutations are present in the three driver genes (triple-negative MPNs). While fibrosis in the bone marrow results from the disturbance of inflammatory cytokines, it is fundamentally associated with mutation-driven hematopoiesis. The mutation profile and order of acquiring diverse mutations influence the MPN phenotype. Mutation profiling reveals clonal diversity in MF, offering insights into the clonal evolution of neoplastic progression. Prognostic prediction plays a pivotal role in guiding the treatment of myelofibrosis. Mutation profiles and cytogenetic abnormalities have been integrated into advanced prognostic scoring systems and personalized risk stratification for MF. Presently, JAK inhibitors are part of the standard of care for MF, with newer generations developed for enhanced efficacy and reduced adverse effects. However, only a minority of patients have achieved a significant molecular-level response. Clinical trials exploring innovative approaches, such as combining hypomethylation agents that target epigenetic regulators, drugs proven effective in myelodysplastic syndrome, or immune and inflammatory modulators with JAK inhibitors, have demonstrated promising results. These combinations may be more effective in patients with high-risk mutations and complex mutation profiles. Expanding mutation profiling studies with more sensitive and specific molecular methods, as well as sequencing a broader spectrum of genes in clinical patients, may reveal molecular mechanisms in cases currently lacking detectable driver mutations, provide a better understanding of the association between genetic alterations and clinical phenotypes, and offer valuable information to advance personalized treatment protocols to improve long-term survival and eradicate mutant clones with the hope of curing MF.

Treatment of anemia in myelofibrosis: focusing on novel therapeutic options

INTRODUCTION

Myelofibrosis is a clonal myeloproliferative neoplasm associated with the proliferation of hematopoietic stem cells, increased bone marrow fibrosis, extramedullary hematopoiesis, hepatosplenomegaly, abnormal cytokine production, and constitutional symptoms. These and many other factors contribute to the development of anemia in myelofibrosis patients.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes novel and promising treatments for anemia in myelofibrosis including transforming growth factor-β inhibitors luspatercept and KER-050, JAK inhibitors momelotinib, pacritinib, and jaktinib, BET inhibitors pelabresib and ABBV-744, antifibrotic PRM-151, BCL2/BCL-XL inhibitor navitoclax, and telomerase inhibitor imetelstat.

EXPERT OPINION

Standard approaches to treat myelofibrosis-related anemia have limited efficacy and are associated with toxicity. New drugs have shown positive results in myelofibrosis-associated anemia when used alone or in combination.

Management of classical Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms in Asia: consensus of the Asian Myeloid Working Group

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are a heterogeneous group of clonal hematopoietic stem cell disorders characterized clinically by the proliferation of one or more hematopoietic lineage(s). The classical Philadelphia-chromosome (Ph)-negative MPNs include polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET) and primary myelofibrosis (PMF). The Asian Myeloid Working Group (AMWG) comprises representatives from fifteen Asian centers experienced in the management of MPN. This consensus from the AMWG aims to review the current evidence in the risk stratification and treatment of Ph-negative MPN, to identify management gaps for future improvement, and to offer pragmatic approaches for treatment commensurate with different levels of resources, drug availabilities and reimbursement policies in its constituent regions. The management of MPN should be patient-specific and based on accurate diagnostic and prognostic tools. In patients with PV, ET and early/prefibrotic PMF, symptoms and risk stratification will guide the need for early cytoreduction. In younger patients requiring cytoreduction and in those experiencing resistance or intolerance to hydroxyurea, recombinant interferon-α preparations (pegylated interferon-α 2A or ropeginterferon-α 2b) should be considered. In myelofibrosis, continuous risk assessment and symptom burden assessment are essential in guiding treatment selection. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT) in MF should always be based on accurate risk stratification for disease-risk and post-HSCT outcome. Management of classical Ph-negative MPN entails accurate diagnosis, cytogenetic and molecular evaluation, risk stratification, and treatment strategies that are outcome-oriented (curative, disease modification, improvement of quality-of-life).

Real-world outcomes with fedratinib therapy in patients who discontinued ruxolitinib for primary myelofibrosis

Aim: Fedratinib is an oral selective JAK2 inhibitor approved in the USA for the treatment of adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary or secondary myelofibrosis (MF). Methods: This observational study assessed adult US patients who received ruxolitinib for primary MF (Flatiron Health database: 1 January 2011-31 October 2020). Patients were stratified by post-ruxolitinib treatment (fedratinib vs non-fedratinib). Results: Characteristics were comparable between fedratinib (n=70) and non-fedratinib (n=159) groups (median age: 71.0 vs 70.0 years; females: 55.7 vs 50.3%; median follow-up: 7.0 vs 6.0 months). Median overall survival (not reached vs 17 months) and 12 month survival (71.6 vs 53.5%) were improved with fedratinib versus the non-fedratinib therapies. Conclusion: In MF patients who received frontline ruxolitinib, survival was improved with subsequent fedratinib versus non-fedratinib care.

New era for myelofibrosis treatment with novel agents beyond Janus kinase-inhibitor monotherapy: Focus on clinical development of BCL-XL /BCL-2 inhibition with navitoclax

Myelofibrosis is a heterogeneous myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by chronic inflammation, progressive bone marrow failure, and hepatosplenic extramedullary hematopoiesis. Treatments like Janus kinase inhibitor monotherapy (e.g., ruxolitinib) provide significant spleen and symptom relief but demonstrate limited ability to lead to a durable disease modification. There is an urgent unmet medical need for treatments with a novel mechanism of action that can modify the underlying pathophysiology and affect the disease course of myelofibrosis. This review highlights the role of B-cell lymphoma (BCL) protein BCL-extra large (BCL-XL ) in disease pathogenesis and the potential role that navitoclax, a BCL-extra large/BCL-2 inhibitor, may have in myelofibrosis treatment.

MANIFEST: Pelabresib in Combination With Ruxolitinib for Janus Kinase Inhibitor Treatment-Naïve Myelofibrosis

PURPOSE

Standard therapy for myelofibrosis comprises Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis), yet spleen response rates of 30%-40%, high discontinuation rates, and a lack of disease modification highlight an unmet need. Pelabresib (CPI-0610) is an investigational, selective oral bromodomain and extraterminal domain inhibitor (BETi).

METHODS

MANIFEST (ClinicalTrails.gov identifier: NCT02158858), a global, open-label, nonrandomized, multicohort, phase II study, includes a cohort of JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis treated with pelabresib and ruxolitinib. The primary end point is a spleen volume reduction of ≥ 35% (SVR35) at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Eighty-four patients received ≥ 1 dose of pelabresib and ruxolitinib. The median age was 68 (range, 37-85) years; 24% of patients were intermediate-1 risk, 61% were intermediate-2 risk, and 16% were high risk as per the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System; 66% (55 of 84) of patients had a hemoglobin level of < 10 g/dL at baseline. At 24 weeks, 68% (57 of 84) achieved SVR35, and 56% (46 of 82) achieved a total symptom score reduction of ≥ 50% (TSS50). Additional benefits at week 24 included 36% (29 of 84) of patients with improved hemoglobin levels (mean, 1.3 g/dL; median, 0.8 g/dL), 28% (16 of 57) with ≥ 1 grade improvement in fibrosis, and 29.5% (13 of 44) with > 25% reduction in JAK2V617F-mutant allele fraction, which was associated with SVR35 response (P = .018, Fisher's exact test). At 48 weeks, 60% (47 of 79) of patients had SVR35 response. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities seen in ≥ 10% patients were thrombocytopenia (12%) and anemia (35%), leading to treatment discontinuation in three patients. 95% (80 of 84) of the study participants continued combination therapy beyond 24 weeks.

CONCLUSION

The rational combination of the BETi pelabresib and ruxolitinib in JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis was well tolerated and showed durable improvements in spleen and symptom burden, with associated biomarker findings of potential disease-modifying activity.

Current therapies for classic myeloproliferative neoplasms: A focus on pathophysiology and supportive care

PURPOSE

This article concisely evaluates current therapies that have received regulatory approval for the treatment of classic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). Pertinent pathophysiology and supportive care are discussed. Emerging therapies are also briefly described.

SUMMARY

MPNs are a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by acquired abnormalities of hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs), resulting in the generation of transformed myeloid progenitor cells that overproduce mature and immature cells within the myeloid lineage. Mutations in JAK2 and other driver oncogenes are central to the genetic variability of these diseases. Cytoreductive therapies such as hydroxyurea, anagrelide, interferon, and therapeutic phlebotomy aim to lower the risk of thrombotic events without exposing patients to an increased risk of leukemic transformation. However, no comparisons can be made between these therapies, as reduction of thrombotic risk has not been used as an endpoint. On the other hand, Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors such as ruxolitinib, fedratinib, pacritinib, and momelotinib (an investigational agent at the time of writing) directly target the constitutively activated JAK-signal transducer and activator of transcription (JAK-STAT) pathway of HSCs in the bone marrow. Mutations of genes in the JAK-STAT signaling pathway provide a unifying understanding of MPNs, spur therapeutic innovations, and represent opportunities for pharmacists to optimize mitigation strategies for both disease-related and treatment-related adverse effects.

CONCLUSION

Treatment options for MPNs span a wide range of disease mechanisms. The growth of targeted therapies holds promise for expanding the treatment arsenal for these rare, yet complex diseases and creates opportunities to optimize supportive care for affected patients.

Momelotinib in Myelofibrosis Patients With Thrombocytopenia: Post Hoc Analysis From Three Randomized Phase 3 Trials

The oral activin A receptor type I, Janus kinase 1 (JAK1), and JAK2 inhibitor momelotinib demonstrated symptom, spleen, and anemia benefits in intermediate- and high-risk myelofibrosis (MF). Post hoc analyses herein evaluated the efficacy and safety of momelotinib in patients with MF and thrombocytopenia (platelet counts <100 × 109/L) from randomized phase 3 studies: MOMENTUM (momelotinib versus danazol; JAK inhibitor experienced); SIMPLIFY-1 (momelotinib versus ruxolitinib; JAK inhibitor naïve); and SIMPLIFY-2 (momelotinib versus best available therapy; JAK inhibitor experienced); these studies were not statistically powered to assess differences in thrombocytopenic subgroups, and these analyses are descriptive. The treatment effect of momelotinib versus ruxolitinib on week 24 response rates (spleen volume reduction ≥35%/Total Symptom Score reduction ≥50%/transfusion independence) was numerically comparable or better in thrombocytopenic patients versus the overall JAK inhibitor naive population; rates were preserved with momelotinib in thrombocytopenic patients but attenuated with ruxolitinib (momelotinib: 27%/28%/67% overall versus 39%/35%/61% in thrombocytopenic group; ruxolitinib: 29%/42%/49% overall versus 0%/22%/39% in thrombocytopenic group, respectively). In contrast to ruxolitinib, momelotinib maintained high dose intensity throughout the treatment. In the JAK inhibitor experienced population, thrombocytopenic patients had the following: (1) numerically higher symptom and transfusion independence response rates with momelotinib than in control arms; and (2) preserved spleen, symptom, and transfusion independence response rates with momelotinib relative to the overall study populations. The safety profile of momelotinib in thrombocytopenic patients was also consistent with the overall study population. In summary, momelotinib represents a safe and effective treatment option for patients with MF and moderate-to-severe thrombocytopenia.

A Prognostic Model to Predict Ruxolitinib Discontinuation and Death in Patients with Myelofibrosis

Most patients with myelofibrosis (MF) discontinue ruxolitinib (JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor) in the first 5 years of therapy due to therapy failure. As the therapeutic possibilities of MF are expanding, it is critical to identify patients predisposed to early ruxolitinib monotherapy failure and worse outcomes. We investigated predictors of early ruxolitinib discontinuation and death on therapy in 889 patients included in the "RUX-MF" retrospective study. Overall, 172 patients were alive on ruxolitinib after ≥5 years (long-term ruxolitinib, LTR), 115 patients were alive but off ruxolitinib after ≥5 yrs (short-term RUX, STR), and 123 patients died while on ruxolitinib after <5 yrs (early death on ruxolitinib, EDR). The cumulative incidence of the blast phase was similar in LTR and STR patients (p = 0.08). Overall survival (OS) was significantly longer in LTR pts (p = 0.002). In multivariate analysis, PLT < 100 × 109/L, Hb < 10 g/dL, primary MF, absence of spleen response at 3 months and ruxolitinib starting dose <10 mg BID were associated with higher probability of STR. Assigning one point to each significant variable, a prognostic model for STR (STR-PM) was built, and three groups were identified: low (score 0-1), intermediate (score 2), and high risk (score ≥ 3). The STR-PM may identify patients at higher risk of failure with ruxolitinib monotherapy who should be considered for alternative frontline strategies.

Safety and efficacy of zinpentraxin alfa as monotherapy or in combination with ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis: stage I of a phase II trial

Pentraxin 2 (PTX-2; serum amyloid P component), a circulating endogenous regulator of the inflammatory response to tissue injury and fibrosis, is reduced in patients with myelofibrosis (MF). Zinpentraxin alfa (RO7490677, PRM-151) is a recombinant form of PTX-2 that has shown preclinical antifibrotic activity and no dose-limiting toxicities in phase I trials. We report results from stage 1 of a phase II trial of zinpentraxin alfa in patients with intermediate-1/2 or high-risk MF. Patients (n=27) received intravenous zinpentraxin α weekly (QW) or every 4 weeks (Q4W), as monotherapy or an additional therapy for patients on stable-dose ruxolitinib. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR; investigatorassessed) adapted from International Working Group-Myeloproliferative Neoplasms Research and Treatment criteria. Secondary endpoints included modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm-Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS) change, bone marrow (BM) MF grade reduction, pharmacokinetics, and safety. ORR at week 24 was 33% (n=9/27) and varied across individual cohorts (QW: 38% [3/8]; Q4W: 14% [1/7]; QW+ruxolitinib: 33% [2/6]; Q4W+ruxolitinib: 50% [3/6]). Five of 18 evaluable patients (28%) experienced a ≥50% reduction in MPN-SAF TSS, and six of 17 evaluable patients (35%) had a ≥1 grade improvement from baseline in BM fibrosis at week 24. Most treatment-emergent adverse events (AE) were grade 1-2, most commonly fatigue. Among others, anemia and thrombocytopenia were infrequent (n=3 and n=1, respectively). Treatment-related serious AE occurred in four patients (15%). Overall, zinpentraxin alfa showed evidence of clinical activity and tolerable safety as monotherapy and in combination with ruxolitinib in this open-label, non-randomized trial (clinicaltrials gov. Identifier: NCT01981850).

AIPSS-MF machine learning prognostic score validation in a cohort of myelofibrosis patients treated with ruxolitinib

BACKGROUND

In myelofibrosis (MF), new model scores are continuously proposed to improve the ability to better identify patients with the worst outcomes. In this context, the Artificial Intelligence Prognostic Scoring System for Myelofibrosis (AIPSS-MF), and the Response to Ruxolitinib after 6 months (RR6) during the ruxolitinib (RUX) treatment, could play a pivotal role in stratifying these patients.

AIMS

We aimed to validate AIPSS-MF in patients with MF who started RUX treatment, compared to the standard prognostic scores at the diagnosis and the RR6 scores after 6 months of treatment.

METHODS AND RESULTS

At diagnosis, the AIPSS-MF performs better than the widely used IPSS for primary myelofibrosis (C-index 0.636 vs. 0.596) and MYSEC-PM for secondary (C-index 0.616 vs. 0.593). During RUX treatment, we confirmed the leading role of RR6 in predicting an inadequate response by these patients to JAKi therapy compared to AIPSS-MF (0.682 vs. 0.571).

CONCLUSION

The new AIPSS-MF prognostic score confirms that it can adequately stratify this subgroup of patients already at diagnosis better than standard models, laying the foundations for new prognostic models developed tailored to the patient based on artificial intelligence.

Safety and efficacy of jaktinib (a novel JAK inhibitor) in patients with myelofibrosis who are relapsed or refractory to ruxolitinib: A single-arm, open-label, phase 2, multicenter study

Ruxolitinib has demonstrated efficacy in patients with myelofibrosis (MF). However, substantial number of patients may not respond after 3-6 months of treatment or develop resistance over time. In this phase 2 trial, patients with a current diagnosis of intermediate or high-risk MF who either had an inadequate splenic response or spleen regrowth after ruxolitinib treatment were enrolled. All patients received jaktinib 100 mg Bid. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SVR 35) at week 24. The secondary endpoints included change of MF-related symptoms, anemic response, and safety profile. From July 6, 2021, to January 24, 2022, 34 ruxolitinib-refractory or relapsed patients were enrolled, 52.9% (18 of 34) were DIPSS intermediate 2 or high risk. SVR 35 at week 24 was 32.4% (11 of 34, 95% CI 19.1%-49.2%) in all patients and 33.3% (6 of 18, 95% CI 16.3%-56.3%) in the intermediate 2 or high-risk group. A total of 50% (8 of 16) transfusion-independent patients with hemoglobin (HGB) <100 g/L at baseline had HGB elevation ≥20 g/L within 24 weeks. Furthermore, 46.4% (13 of 28) of patients had a ≥ 50% decrease in the total symptom score (TSS 50) at week 24. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were thrombocytopenia (32.4%), anemia (32.4%), and leukocytosis (20.6%). In total, 13 (38.2%) of 34 patients had serious adverse events (SAE), of which drug-related SAEs were found in 5 patients (14.7%). These results indicate that jaktinib can be a promising treatment option for patients with MF who have either become refractory to or relapsed after ruxolitinib treatment.

A Journey Through JAK Inhibitors for the Treatment of Myeloproliferative Diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) represent a group of diseases characterised by constitutive activation of the JAK/STAT pathway in a clonal myeloid precursor. The therapeutic approach aims to treat the symptom burden (headache, itching, debilitation), splenomegaly, slow down the fibrotic proliferation in the bone marrow and reduce the risk of thrombosis/bleeding whilst avoiding leukaemic transformation.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, the advent of JAK inhibitors (JAKi) has significantly broadened treatment options for these patients. In myelofibrosis, symptom control and splenomegaly reduction can improve quality of life with improved overall survival, not impacting progression into acute leukaemia. Several JAKi are available and used worldwide, and combination approaches are now being explored. In this chapter, we review the approved JAKi, highlighting its strengths, exploring potential guidelines in choosing which one to use and reasoning towards future perspectives, where the combinations of therapies seem to promise the best results.

Safety and efficacy of jaktinib (a novel JAK inhibitor) in patients with myelofibrosis who are intolerant to ruxolitinib: A single-arm, open-label, phase 2, multicenter study

Although ruxolitinib improves splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms in patients with myelofibrosis (MF), a substantial proportion of patients discontinue ruxolitinib because of intolerance. This phase 2 trial investigated the safety and efficacy of jaktinib, a novel JAK inhibitor in patients with ruxolitinib-intolerant MF. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with ≥35% reduction in spleen volume (SVR35) at week 24. The secondary endpoints included change of MF-related symptoms, anemic response, and safety profiles. Between December 18, 2019, and November 24, 2021, 51 patients were enrolled, 45 treated with jaktinib 100 mg bid (100 mg bid group) and six received non-100 mg bid doses (non-100 mg bid group). The SVR35 at week 24 in the 100 mg bid group was 43.2% (19/44, 95% CI 29.7%-57.8%). There were 41.9% (13/31) of transfusion-independent patients with hemoglobin (HGB) ≤100 g/L who had HGB elevation ≥20 g/L within 24 weeks. The proportion of patients with a ≥50% decrease in the total symptom score (TSS 50) at week 24 was 61.8% (21/34). The most commonly reported grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) in the 100 mg bid group were anemia 31.1%, thrombocytopenia 22.2%, and infectious pneumonia 17.8%. A total of 16 (35.6%) in the 100 mg bid group had serious adverse events, and 4 (8.9%) were considered possibly drug related. These results indicate jaktinib can provide a treatment option for patients with MF who are intolerant to ruxolitinib.

Micheliolide exerts effects in myeloproliferative neoplasms through inhibiting STAT3/5 phosphorylation via covalent binding to STAT3/5 proteins

Ruxolitinib is a cornerstone of management for some subsets of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs); however, a considerable number of patients respond suboptimally. Here, we evaluated the efficacy of micheliolide (MCL), a natural guaianolide sesquiterpene lactone, alone or in combination with ruxolitinib in samples from patients with MPNs, JAK2V617F-mutated MPN cell lines, and a Jak2V617F knock-in mouse model. MCL effectively suppressed colony formation of hematopoietic progenitors in samples from patients with MPNs and inhibited cell growth and survival of MPN cell lines in vitro. Co-treatment with MCL and ruxolitinib resulted in greater inhibitory effects compared with treatment with ruxolitinib alone. Moreover, dimethylaminomicheliolide (DMAMCL), an orally available derivative of MCL, significantly increased the efficacy of ruxolitinib in reducing splenomegaly and cytokine production in Jak2V617F knock-in mice without evident effects on normal hematopoiesis. Importantly, MCL could target the Jak2V617F clone and reduce mutant allele burden in vivo. Mechanistically, MCL can form a stable covalent bond with cysteine residues of STAT3/5 to suppress their phosphorylation, thus inhibiting JAK/STAT signaling. Overall, these findings suggest that MCL is a promising drug in combination with ruxolitinib in the setting of suboptimal response to ruxolitinib.

The pharmacotherapeutic management of patients with myelofibrosis: looking beyond JAK inhibitors

INTRODUCTION

The approach to myelofibrosis (MF) has been revolutionized in recent years, overcoming the traditional therapies, often not very effective. Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKi - from ruxolitinib up to momelotinib) were the first class of drugs with considerable results.

AREAS COVERED

Ongoing, new molecules are being tested that promise to give hope even to those patients not eligible for bone marrow transplants who become intolerant or are refractory to JAKi, for which therapeutic hopes are currently limited. Telomerase, murine double minute 2 (MDM2), phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase δ (PI3Kδ), BCL-2/xL, and bromodomain and extra-terminal motif (BET) inhibitors are the drugs with promising results in clinical trials and close to closure with consequent placing on the market, finally allowing JAK to look beyond. The novelty of the MF field was searched in the PubMed database, and the recently completed/ongoing trials are extrapolated from the ClinicalTrial website.

EXPERT OPINION

From this point of view, the use of new molecules widely described in this review, probably in association with JAKi, will represent the future treatment of choice in MF, leaving, in any case, the potential new approaches actually in an early stage of development, such as the use of immunotherapy in targeting CALR, which is coming soon.

Recent progress of JAK inhibitors for hematological disorders

JAK inhibitors are important therapeutic options for hematological disorders, especially myeloproliferative neoplasms. Ruxolitinib, the first JAK inhibitor approved for clinical use, improves splenomegaly and ameliorates constitutional symptoms in both myelofibrosis and polycythemia vera patients. Ruxolitinib is also useful for controlling hematocrit levels in polycythemia vera patients who were inadequately controlled by conventional therapies. Furthermore, pretransplantation use of ruxolitinib may improve the outcome of allo-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in myelofibrosis. In contrast to these clinical merits, evidence of the disease-modifying action of ruxolitinib, i.e., reduction of malignant clones or improvement of bone marrow pathological findings, is limited, and many myelofibrosis patients discontinued ruxolitinib due to adverse events or disease progression. To overcome these limitations of ruxolitinib, several new types of JAK inhibitors have been developed. Among them, fedratinib was proven to provide clinical merits even in patients who were resistant or intolerant to ruxolitinib. Pacritinib and momelotinib have shown merits for myelofibrosis patients with thrombocytopenia or anemia, respectively. In addition to treatment for myeloproliferative neoplasms, recent studies have demonstrated that JAK inhibitors are novel and attractive therapeutic options for corticosteroid-refractory acute as well as chronic graft versus host disease.

Telomerase-targeted therapies in myeloid malignancies

Human telomeres are tandem arrays that are predominantly composed of 5'-TTAGGG-3' nucleotide sequences at the terminal ends of chromosomes. These sequences serve 2 primary functions: they preserve genomic integrity by protecting the ends of chromosomes, preventing inappropriate degradation by DNA repair mechanisms, and they prevent loss of genetic information during cellular division. When telomeres shorten to reach a critical length, termed the Hayflick limit, cell senescence or death is triggered. Telomerase is a key enzyme involved in synthesizing and maintaining the length of telomeres within rapidly dividing cells and is upregulated across nearly all malignant cells. Accordingly, targeting telomerase to inhibit uncontrolled cell growth has been an area of great interest for decades. In this review, we summarize telomere and telomerase biology because it relates to both physiologic and malignant cells. We discuss the development of telomere- and telomerase-targeted therapeutic candidates within the realm of myeloid malignancies. We overview all mechanisms of targeting telomerase that are currently in development, with a particular focus on imetelstat, an oligonucleotide with direct telomerase inhibitory properties that has advanced the furthest in clinical development and has demonstrated promising data in multiple myeloid malignancies.

Bomedemstat as an investigative treatment for myeloproliferative neoplasms

INTRODUCTION

Myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) is a heterogeneous group of hematopoietic stem cell disorders characterized by clonal proliferation of one of more of the hematopoietic stem cell lineages. Clinical manifestations result from uncontrolled myeloproliferation, extramedullary hematopoiesis with splenomegaly and excessive inflammatory cytokine production. Currently available therapy improves hematologic parameters and symptoms but does not adequately address the underlying neoplastic biology. Bomedemstat has thus far demonstrated clinical efficacy and tolerability in the treatment of MPNs with recent evidence of impacting the malignant stem cell population.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes the mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, safety and efficacy of bomedemstat in MPN with specific emphasis on essential thrombocythemia (ET) and myelofibrosis (MF).

EXPERT OPINION

In patients with MPNs, bomedemstat appears effective and well tolerated. The signs and symptoms of these diseases are managed as a reduction in the frequency of mutant cells was demonstrated in patients with ET and MF. Ongoing and planned studies of bomedemstat in MPN will establish the position of bomedemstat in MPNs and may help to redefine treatment endpoints of MPNs in the future.

Association of Myelofibrosis Phenotypes with Clinical Manifestations, Molecular Profiles, and Treatments

Myelofibrosis (MF) presents an array of clinical manifestations and molecular profiles. The two distinct phenotypes- myeloproliferative and myelodepletive or cytopenic- are situated at the two poles of the disease spectrum and are largely defined by different degrees of cytopenias, splenomegaly, and distinct molecular profiles. The myeloproliferative phenotype is characterized by normal/higher peripheral blood counts or mildly decreased hemoglobin, progressive splenomegaly, and constitutional symptoms. The myeloproliferative phenotype is typically associated with secondary MF, higher JAK2 V617F burden, fewer mutations, and superior overall survival (OS). The myelodepletive phenotype is usually associated with primary MF, ≥2 cytopenias, modest splenomegaly, lower JAK2 V617F burden, higher fibrosis, greater genomic complexity, and inferior OS. Cytopenias are associated with mutations in epigenetic regulators/splicing factors, clonal evolution, disease progression, and shorter OS. Clinical variables, in conjunction with the molecular profiles, inform integrated prognostication and disease management. Ruxolitinib/fedratinib and pacritinib/momelotinib may be more suitable to treat patients with the myeloproliferative and myelodepletive phenotypes, respectively. Appreciation of MF heterogeneity and two distinct phenotypes, the different clinical manifestations and molecular profiles associated with each phenotype alongside the growing treatment expertise, the development of non-myelosuppressive JAK inhibitors, and integrated prognostication are leading to a new era in patient management. Physicians can increasingly tailor personalized treatments that will address the unique unmet needs of MF patients, including those presenting with the myelodepletive phenotype, to elicit optimal outcomes and extended OS across the disease spectrum.

Treating accelerated and blast phase myeloproliferative neoplasms: progress and challenges

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are a group of clonal hematologic malignancies that include polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and myelofibrosis (MF). MPNs are characterized by activating mutations in the JAK/STAT pathway and an increased risk of transformation to an aggressive form of acute leukemia, termed MPN-blast phase (MPN-BP). MPN-BP is characterized by the presence of ⩾20% blasts in the blood or bone marrow and is almost always preceded by an accelerated phase (MPN-AP) defined as ⩾10-19% blasts in the blood or bone marrow. These advanced forms of disease are associated with poor prognosis with a median overall survival (mOS) of 3-5 months in MPN-BP and 13 months in MPN-AP. MPN-AP/BP has a unique molecular landscape characterized by increased intratumoral complexity. Standard therapies used in de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) have not demonstrated improvement in OS. Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) remains the only curative therapy but is associated with significant morbidity and mortality and infrequently utilized in clinical practice. Therefore, an urgent unmet need persists for effective therapies in this advanced phase patient population. Here, we review the current management and future directions of therapy in MPN-AP/BP.

Moving Beyond Ruxolitinib Failure in Myelofibrosis: Evolving Strategies for Second Line Therapy

Ruxolitinib has been the cornerstone of pharmacologic therapy for myelofibrosis for over a decade. However, the last several years have witnessed the regulatory approval of other Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors for myelofibrosis, i.e. fedratinib, pacritinib, and US approval of momelotinib is widely anticipated in 2023. Due to the multifaceted clinical presentation of myelofibrosis, a watertight definition of ruxolitinib failure has remained elusive, as "progression" on ruxolitinib can take many forms and management is highly nuanced. Yet, the availability of other JAK inhibitors and potential future availability of non-JAK inhibitor agents for myelofibrosis make a consensus on management of ruxolitinib failure critically important. This consensus paper summarizes a discussion between multiple academic and community physician experts, a pharmacist and an advanced practice provider around the issues to be considered for the optimal care of patients with myelofibrosis whose disease is refractory to or does not respond adequately to ruxolitinib, or who exhibit intolerance to ruxolitinib. The panel identified several areas of consensus, as well as some areas where more data to inform evidence-based practice are needed. In some situations, maintaining ruxolitinib while adding another agent, e.g. to address anemia, is appropriate, whereas in others, switching to a different drug has merit.

Defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis: a modified Delphi panel consensus study

Aim: To define ruxolitinib failure and develop parameters to guide transition to next-line therapy for patients with myelofibrosis. Methods: A modified Delphi panel with 14 hematologists-oncologists. Survey concepts included defining primary refractory status, loss of response, disease progression, intolerance and transition to next-line therapy. Results: Ruxolitinib failure may be defined as no improvement in symptoms or spleen size, progressive disease or ruxolitinib intolerance, following a maximally tolerated dose for ≥3 months. Loss of spleen response 1 month after initial response may prompt discontinuation. Lack of evidence to inform transition to next-line therapy was noted; tapering ruxolitinib should be considered according to ruxolitinib dose and patient characteristics. Conclusion: Expert consensus was provided on defining ruxolitinib failure and transition to next-line therapy as summarized in this position paper, which may support considerations in the development of future clinical practice guidelines.

Ten years after ruxolitinib approval for myelofibrosis: a review of clinical efficacy

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by splenomegaly, abnormal cytokine expression, cytopenias, and progressive bone marrow fibrosis. The disease often manifests with burdensome symptoms and is associated with reduced survival. Ruxolitinib, an oral Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2 inhibitor, was the first agent approved for MF. As a first-in-class targeted treatment, ruxolitinib approval transformed the MF treatment approach and remains standard of care. In addition, targeted inhibition of JAK1/JAK2 signaling, a key molecular pathway underlying MF pathogenesis, and the large volume of literature evaluating ruxolitinib, have led to a better understanding of the disease and improved management in general. Here we review ruxolitinib efficacy in patients with MF in the 10 years following approval, including demonstration of clinical benefit in the phase 3 COMFORT-I/II trials, real-world evidence, translational studies, and expanded access data. Lastly, future directions for MF treatment are discussed, including ruxolitinib-based combination therapies.