Baseline factors associated with response to ruxolitinib: an independent study on 408 patients with myelofibrosis

Emerging Therapeutic Approaches for Anemia in Myelofibrosis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we highlight conventional agents and novel emerging therapeutic strategies to treat anemia in MF.

RECENT FINDINGS

Anemia is a common and challenging feature of myelofibrosis (MF). The pathobiology of anemia is multifactorial, including progressive bone marrow fibrosis, decreased erythropoiesis due to high hepcidin levels leading to iron sequestration in the reticuloendothelial system, hypersplenism, erythropoiesis inhibition by myelosuppressive JAK inhibitors (ruxolitinib, fedratinib), and others. MF-associated anemia has a negative impact on survival. Conventional agents to manage anemia include erythropoiesis-stimulating agents, danazol, corticosteroids, and immunomodulatory agents, but responses are infrequent and lack durability. Notable advancements have emerged in developing novel treatments for anemia in MF, including the regulatory approval of momelotinib (ACVR1/JAK1/2 inhibitor) in 2023 and development of novel promising agents targeting hemojuvelin and activins. Momelotinib and pacritinib (ACVR1/JAK2 inhibitor) are the preferred JAK inhibitors for patients with cytopenias (anemia, thrombocytopenia). Luspatercept and elritercept are activin receptor ligand traps, promoting erythroid maturation and late-stage erythropoiesis. Currently, luspatercept is being evaluated in a phase 3 trial (INDEPENDENCE™) for anemia in MF patients who are on a JAK2 inhibitor and require transfusions, and in a phase 2 trial (ODYSSEY) in combination with momelotinib in MF patients who are transfusion dependent, whether or not on a JAK inhibitor. Interim results of the RESTORE trial demonstrated that elritercept significantly decreased transfusions in MF patients. DISC-0974 is a first-in-class anti-hemojuvelin (positive hepcidin regulator) monoclonal antibody that decreased hepcidin expression, increased serum iron, and enhanced erythropoiesis in anemic patients with MF in a phase 1b/2 study. Burgeoning studies of novel anemia-targeted agents and combinations are significantly improving the quality of life and outcomes of patients with MF. The recent approval of momelotinib to treat MF with anemia and the emerging novel anemia-directed strategies in early and advanced clinical development have ushered in a new era in the treatment of MF-related anemia.

How I individualize selection of JAK inhibitors for patients with myelofibrosis

ABSTRACT

The advent of Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) inaugurated a novel era in the treatment of myelofibrosis (MF), a myeloproliferative neoplasm with heterogeneous clinical manifestations. Four JAKis have been approved for intermediate or high-risk MF, in the United States. Regulatory approval of the first JAK1/2 inhibitor, ruxolitinib, in 2011, transformed the landscape of MF by markedly controlling splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, improving patients' quality of life, and prolonging survival. Fedratinib, the second approved JAKi, is preferred in the second-line setting. Ruxolitinib and fedratinib can cause myelosuppression and are recommended for patients with the myeloproliferative phenotype. The approval of 2 less-myelosuppressive JAKis, pacritinib and momelotinib, provided essential treatment options for patients with severe thrombocytopenia and anemia, respectively. Momelotinib and pacritinib are potent activin A receptor, type 1 inhibitors with consequent significant benefits for patients with anemia. Transfusion independence was achieved with momelotinib in patients who were severely anemic, and the association of transfusion independence with prolonged overall survival was demonstrated. Judicious treatment decisions regarding JAKis can be made with in-depth understanding of the pivotal clinical trials that evaluated JAKis and their therapeutic attributes and should be guided by the dominant clinical manifestations and the type/degree of cytopenia(s) (myeloproliferative/cytopenic phenotypes). This article reviews our clinical approach to treatment with JAKis and their sequencing in patients with MF by presenting 3 clinical vignettes.

Dosing and clinical outcomes of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in a real-world setting: Interim results of the Italian observational study (ROMEI)

BACKGROUND

Myelofibrosis (MF) significantly impacts patients' overall survival (OS) and quality of life (QOL). This prospective study analyzed ruxolitinib dosing patterns and associated clinical outcomes in patients with MF over 12 months.

METHODS

ROMEI, a multicenter, observational, ongoing study, enrolled 508 adult patients with MF treated with ruxolitinib. For the current interim analysis, eligible patients with baseline platelet values were categorized into two groups based on ruxolitinib starting dosage: as expected (AsEx, n = 174) and lower than expected (LtEx, n = 132); ruxolitinib dose changes, interruptions and time to permanent discontinuation were analyzed, along with symptoms response, health-related QOL scores, spleen response, OS, and safety.

RESULTS

Forty-three percent of patients started at a lower-than-expected dose. Both groups showed reduction in average daily ruxolitinib doses over 12 months. Symptoms response rate was similar in both groups at week 48 (40.8% AsEx vs 40.9% LtEx). The AsEx group demonstrated higher spleen response rates at both 24 weeks (50.0% vs 30.2%) and 48 weeks (57.7% vs 45.8%) with a shorter median time to first response (3.3 vs 11.1 months, p = .019) when compared to the LtEx group. Both groups showed upward trends in health-related QOL values. Estimated median OS was not reached for the AsEx group versus 4.7 years in the LtEx group (p = .014). Adverse events were reported in 87.4% and 84.9% of patients in the AsEx and LtEx groups, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The ROMEI study demonstrated the importance of optimal ruxolitinib dosage in patients with MF for maximum effectiveness and improved OS, with manageable safety.

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.

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.

The impact of starting dose on overall survival in myelofibrosis patients treated with ruxolitinib: A prospective real-world study on AIFA monitoring registries

Ruxolitinib is a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor approved for the treatment of myelofibrosis (MF)-related splenomegaly or symptoms. The recommended starting dose depends on platelet count, regardless of haemoglobin level at baseline. In the recent years, an overall survival (OS) advantage was reported in patients treated with ruxolitinib compared with best available therapy. We analysed a large Italian cohort of 3494 patients identified by Agenzia Italiana del Farmaco (AIFA) monitoring registries. Of them, 2337 (66.9%) started at reduced dose: these patients were older (median age 70 vs. 67), with increased incidence of large splenomegaly (longitudinal diameter 20 vs. 19.1 cm, median volume 1064 cm3 vs. 1016 cm3), with higher IPSS risk (30.9% vs. 26.1%), and worse ECOG score (more than 1 in 14.3% vs. 9.8%). After balancing for baseline characteristics, Kaplan-Meier analysis showed a median OS of 78.2 months (95% CI 65.9-89) for patients who started at full dose and 52.6 (95% CI 49-56.6) months for patients who started with reduced dose (p < 0.001). Group analysis also showed a substantial difference in patients with intermediate-2 and high IPSS risk. The majority of MF patients in real-world analysis started with a reduced dose of ruxolitinib, which is associated with less favourable outcomes.

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).

Ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis: The earlier, the better?

There is mounting evidence to support the use of ruxolitinib earlier in the disease course of MF. Use in intermediate-1 risk MF is generally associated with higher efficacy and lower toxicity.

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.

Novel approaches in myelofibrosis

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal myeloid neoplasm characterized by bone marrow fibrosis, splenomegaly, and disease-associated symptoms, as well as increased mortality, due to thrombosis, severe bleeding, infections, or progression to acute leukemia. Currently, the management of MF patients is tailored according to risk scores, with higher-risk (intermediate-2 and high-risk) patients being assessed for allogeneic stem cell transplantation, which remains the only potentially curative treatment option. On the other hand, lower risk (low- and intermediate-1 risk) patients who are symptomatic may be treated with JAK inhibitors or other drugs. However, none of these drug treatments have induced relevant rates of durable complete remissions, and, therefore, novel treatments are needed to improve the long-term outcomes of MF patients. This review summarizes current preclinical and clinical approaches to MF therapy, including novel drug combinations involving JAK inhibitors and innovative monotherapies. These drugs target transcription, nuclear export, survival pathways, or various intracellular pathways, ranging from JAK-STAT signaling to PI3-Kinase, TP53, PIM1, or S100A8/A9/toll-like receptor pathways. Also, extracellular targeting using interferon, calreticulin mutant-specific antibodies, and other immunotherapeutic approaches are discussed, as well as various antifibrotic strategies. In addition, preclinical approaches that target individual mutated clones, for example, by mutation-specific JAK2V617F inhibitors or DNA repair pathway inhibitors, are presented. Finally, current efforts of generating novel endpoints for clinical trials aim more at disease modification and overall survival than at improvements of splenomegaly or symptoms. Together, the new generations of clinical trials promise to offer substantial improvements in the management of MF patients and long-term disease control.

Consistency of Spleen and Symptom Reduction Regardless of Cytopenia in Patients With Myelofibrosis Treated With Pacritinib

BACKGROUND

Pacritinib is a JAK2/IRAK1/ACVR1 inhibitor that is approved in the United States for the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis who have a platelet count < 50 × 109/L. Phase 3 clinical studies of pacritinib included patients across a wide range of baseline platelet and hemoglobin levels.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In order to assess the impact of baseline blood counts on pacritinib efficacy, an analysis of efficacy outcomes by baseline platelet and hemoglobin levels was performed using data pooled from 2 Phase 3 studies of pacritinib in patients with MF (PERSIST-1 and PERSIST-2).

RESULTS

Of 276 patients evaluable for spleen response, spleen volume reduction occurred consistently across platelet subgroups (< 100 × 109/L or ≥ 100 × 109/L) and hemoglobin subgroups (< 8 g/dL, ≥ 8 to < 10 g/dL, or > 10 g/dL), with no diminution in treatment effect in patients with severe thrombocytopenia or anemia. Among 159 patients evaluable for symptoms response, improvement in total symptom score (TTS) was similar across platelet subgroups. A ≥ 50% improvement of TSS occurred more frequently in patients with baseline hemoglobin < 8 g/dL compared with those with baseline hemoglobin ≥ 8 to < 10 g/dL or > 10 g/dL. Patients with baseline hemoglobin < 8 g/dL also experienced improved hemoglobin sustained over 24 weeks, whereas subgroups with less severe anemia had stable hemoglobin levels over time. Symptom improvement as assessed using the Patient Global Impression of Change instrument was generally consistent across platelet and hemoglobin subgroups.

CONCLUSION

Pacritinib demonstrates consistent efficacy in patients with MF regardless of baseline platelet and hemoglobin counts.

Treatment Strategies Used in Treating Myelofibrosis: State of the Art

BACKGROUND

Current drug therapy for myelofibrosis does not alter the natural course of the disease or prolong survival, and allogeneic stem cell transplantation is the only curative treatment modality. For over a decade, the Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor ruxolitinib has been the standard of care. More recently, newer-generation JAK inhibitors have joined the ranks of accepted treatment options.

OBJECTIVES

The primary goal of treatment is to reduce spleen size and minimize disease-related symptoms. Prognostic scoring systems are used to designate patients as being at lower or higher risk. For transplant-eligible patients, transplant is offered to those with a bridge of a JAK inhibitor; patients who are not eligible for transplant are usually offered long-term therapy with a JAK inhibitor. Limited disease-modifying activity, dose-limiting cytopenias, and other adverse effects have contributed to discontinuation of JAK inhibitor treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Novel JAK inhibitors and combination approaches are currently being explored to overcome these shortcomings. Further research will be essential to establish optimal therapeutic approaches in first-line and subsequent treatments.

Identifying disease-modifying potential in myelofibrosis clinical trials

ABSTRACT

The ultimate goal of bringing most new drugs to the clinic in hematologic malignancy is to improve overall survival. However, the use of surrogate end points for overall survival is increasingly considered standard practice, because a well validated surrogate end point can accelerate the outcome assessment and facilitate better clinical trial design. Established examples include monitoring minimal residual disease in chronic myeloid leukemia and acute leukemia, and metabolic response assessment in lymphoma. However, what happens when a clinical trial end point that is not a good surrogate for disease-modifying potential becomes ingrained as an expected outcome, and new agents are expected or required to meet this end point to demonstrate "efficacy"? Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors for myelofibrosis (MF) have a specific impact on reducing symptom burden and splenomegaly but limited impact on the natural history of the disease. Since the introduction of ruxolitinib more than a decade ago there has been modest incremental success in clinical trials for MF but no major leap forward to alter the natural history of the disease. We argue that the clinical development of novel agents for MF will be accelerated by moving away from using end points that are specifically tailored to measure the beneficial effects of JAK inhibitors. We propose that specific measures of relevant disease burden, such as reduction in mutation burden as determined by molecular end points, should replace established end points. Careful reanalysis of existing data and trials in progress is needed to identify the most useful surrogate end points for future MF trials and better serve patient interest.

Epidemiology and disease characteristics of myelofibrosis: a comparative analysis between Italy and global perspectives

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal disorder of hematopoietic stem cells characterized by altered bone marrow function and fibrosis. The aim of this narrative review is to report on the most recent epidemiologic data and to discuss features of MF and current strategies for the management of this condition in clinical practice. MF features covered by our review will include: characteristics of patients with MF; myeloproliferative and myelodepletive phenotypes; MF-associated thrombosis and bleeding; risk of infections; prefibrotic and overt PMF; secondary MF. Finally, we will discuss a few aspects of MF management in clinical practice and suggest strategies for its optimization and standardization. The focus of our paper is on Italy, but relevant data from other countries will also be reviewed.

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.

Ruxolitinib Adherence in Myelofibrosis and Polycythemia Vera: the "RAMP" Italian multicenter prospective study

Ruxolitinib is beneficial in patients with myelofibrosis (MF) and polycythemia vera (PV). Information on ruxolitinib adherence is scant. The Ruxolitinib Adherence in Myelofibrosis and Polycythemia Vera (RAMP) prospective multicenter study (NCT06078319) included 189 ruxolitinib-treated patients. Patients completed the Adherence to Refills and Medications Scale (ARMS) and Distress Thermometer and Problem List (DTPL) at the earliest convenience, after registration in the study, and at later timepoints. At week-0, low adherence (ARMS > 14) and high distress (DT ≥ 4) were declared by 49.7% and 40.2% of patients, respectively. The main reason for low adherence was difficult ruxolitinib supply (49%), intentional (4.3%) and unintentional (46.7%) non-take. In multivariable regression analysis, low adherence was associated to male sex (p = 0.001), high distress (p < 0.001), and treatment duration ≥ 1 year (p = 0.03). Over time, rates of low adherence and high distress remained stable, but unintentional non-take decreased from 47.9% to 26.0% at week-48. MF patients with stable high adherence/low distress were more likely to obtain/maintain the spleen response at week-24. Low adherence to ruxolitinib represents an unmet clinical need that require a multifaceted approach, based on reason behind it (patients characteristics and treatment duration). Its recognition may help distinguishing patients who are truly refractory and those in need of therapy optimization.

Management of Patients with Early Myelofibrosis: A Discussion of Best Practices

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Summarize best practices for management of patients with early myelofibrosis (MF).

RECENT FINDINGS

Myelofibrosis is a progressive myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN) that generally produces burdensome symptoms and ultimately leads to worse overall survival than that observed in healthy controls or patients with other MPNs. Several Janus kinase inhibitors and various interferon formulations are now available for treatment of MF, with ruxolitinib notable for extending overall survival in addition to improving MF signs and symptoms. The chronic nature of the disease can lead some patients to avoid immediate treatment in favor of a watch-and-wait approach. This review summarizes the patient management approach taken in my practice, providing guidance and a discussion of best practices with an emphasis on the importance and clinical benefits of active treatment in early MF. In particular, a case is made to consider treatment with ruxolitinib for patients with intermediate-1 risk disease and to minimize delay between diagnosis and treatment initiation for patients with intermediate or high-risk disease.

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.

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.

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.

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.

The role of therapy in the outcome of patients with myelofibrosis

BACKGROUND

The treatment of patients with myelofibrosis (MF) has evolved in the past decade, as reflected in an increased use of various therapeutic agents that could potentially impact patient outcomes.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, the authors evaluated the pattern of therapy and its possible impact on the survival of patients with MF at their institution. Patients (n = 802) with newly diagnosed, chronic, overt MF (MF fibrosis grade ≥2, <10% blasts) seen at their cancer center between 2000 and 2020 were included.

RESULTS

Overall, 492 of the included patients (61%) initiated MF-directed therapy during follow-up. The most frequent initial therapy was the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib (44% of treated patients), investigational agents excluding JAK inhibitors (21%), immunomodulatory agents (18%), other investigational JAK inhibitors (10%), and others (7%). Overall survival was superior for patients who received initial ruxolitinib therapy, with a median survival of 72 months versus approximately 50 months for the remaining approaches, excluding the last group. Thirty-two percent of patients required subsequent therapy (n = 159). The longest survival since the start of second-line therapy was observed in patients who initiated salvage ruxolitinib (median, 35 months; 95% CI, 25-45 months).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated improved outcomes of patients with MF who received treatment with the JAK inhibitor ruxolitinib.

Relevant Clinical Factors in Patients with Myelofibrosis on Ruxolitinib for 5 or More Years

INTRODUCTION

Median duration of therapy with the first JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib (RUX) approved for patients with intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF) is about 3 years.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we aimed to evaluate clinical features, predictive factors, and outcome of patients presenting to our institution who were able to remain on RUX for ≥5 years (RUX ≥5y, n = 73).

RESULTS

Comparing baseline demographics of patients who remained on RUX ≥5y (n = 73) with patients who were on RUX for 6 months to 3 years (n = 203), we confirmed that patients on RUX ≥5y lacked advanced clinical features at the start of therapy, such as anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, higher blasts or monocytes. Predictive independent factors for staying on RUX ≥5y were hemoglobin >10 g/dL, circulating blasts <1%, platelets >150 × 109/L, neutrophils >70%, and having primary MF. Age over 65 years remained significant for outcome in patients on RUX ≥5y.

CONCLUSION

In this retrospective study, we report on the relevance of absence of advanced clinical features for long RUX therapy and confirm the role of age on outcome despite therapy.

The Sarawak Myelofibrosis (SaMy) experience: Demographics and outcome of myelofibrosis patients in Sarawak, Malaysia

Introduction: Myelofibrosis is a rare disease. There is currently no published data reporting the demographics and outcome of myelofibrosis patients in Malaysia. We aimed to study the demographics, clinical characteristics, and outcome of our patients in Sarawak. Materials and methods: This non-interventional, retrospective, and multi-center study was conducted on secondary data of medical records collected at four Sarawak Public Hospitals. All adult myelofibrosis patients diagnosed between January 2001 and December 2021 were included. Results: A total of 63 patients (male 31) with myelofibrosis were included-47 (74.6%) primary and 16 (25.4%) secondary myelofibrosis. Eleven had antecedent polycythaemia vera, whereas five transformed from essential thrombocythaemia. The combined annual incidence rate was 0.182 per 100,000 population. The period prevalence per 100,000 population over the entire study duration was 2.502. The median age was 59.0 years (33.0-93.0). Majority had high-risk (34/63(54.0%)) and intermediate-2 risk disease (19/63(30.2%)). JAK2V617F mutation was identified in 52 patients (82.5%), followed by CALR mutation in 6 (9.5%) and negative for both mutations in 5 (7.9%). Hydroxyurea was used as first-line therapy in 41/63 (65.1%), followed by interferon (8/63(12.7%)) and ruxolitinib (4/63(6.3%)). Out of 46 patients who received second-line therapy, 18 (39.1%) were switched to ruxolitinib and 9 (19.6%) to interferon. The median age of survival for overall patients was 6.8 years. The use of ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis patients showed a better overall 5-year survival compared to the no ruxolitinib arm, despite no statistical significance (p = 0.34). Patients who had good performance status had lower hazard of death than patients who had poor performance status (high-risk (95% confidence intervals): 0.06(0.013-0.239), p < 0.001). Patients with intermediate risk disease had better overall survival compared to those in high-risk group (95% confidence intervals): 0.24(0.082-0.695), p = 0.009). Conclusion: This registry provides a real-world overview of myelofibrosis patients in our state and highlights the key insight into the unmet clinical need.

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.

Early intervention in myelofibrosis and impact on outcomes: A pooled analysis of the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II studies

BACKGROUND

In a pooled analysis of the phase 3 Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral JAK Inhibitor Treatment I (COMFORT-I) and COMFORT-II clinical trials, adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis who received oral ruxolitinib at randomization or after crossover from placebo or best available therapy (BAT) had improved overall survival (OS).

METHODS

This post hoc analysis of pooled COMFORT data examined relevant disease outcomes based on the disease duration (≤12 or >12 months from diagnosis) before ruxolitinib initiation.

RESULTS

The analysis included 525 patients (ruxolitinib: ≤12 months, n = 84; >12 months, n = 216; placebo/BAT: ≤12 months, n = 66; >12 months, n = 159); the median age was 65.0-70.0 years. Fewer thrombocytopenia and anemia events were observed among patients who initiated ruxolitinib treatment earlier. At Weeks 24 and 48, the spleen volume response (SVR) was higher for patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (47.6% vs. 32.9% at Week 24, p = .0610; 44.0% vs. 26.9% at Week 48, p = .0149). In a multivariable analysis of factors associated with spleen volume reduction, a logistic regression model that controlled for confounding factors found that a significantly greater binary reduction was observed among patients with shorter versus longer disease duration (p = .022). At Week 240, OS was significantly improved among patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (63% [95% CI, 51%-73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 49%-64%]; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31; p = .0430). Regardless of disease duration, a longer OS was observed for patients who received ruxolitinib versus those who received placebo/BAT.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that earlier ruxolitinib initiation for adult patients with intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis may improve clinical outcomes, including fewer cytopenia events, durable SVR, and prolonged OS.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Patients with myelofibrosis, a bone marrow cancer, often do not live as long as the general population. These patients may also have an enlarged spleen and difficult symptoms such as fatigue. Two large clinical trials showed that patients treated with the drug ruxolitinib lived longer and had improved symptoms compared to those treated with placebo or other standard treatments. Here it was examined whether starting treatment with ruxolitinib earlier (i.e., within a year of diagnosis) provided benefits versus delaying treatment. Patients who received ruxolitinib within a year of diagnosis lived longer and experienced fewer disease symptoms than those whose treatment was delayed.

Benefit of Early Ruxolitinib Initiation Regardless of Fibrosis Grade in Patients with Primary Myelofibrosis: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Single-Arm Phase 3b JUMP Study

Bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) is an adverse prognostic factor for myelofibrosis (MF). The single-arm, open-label, phase 3b JUMP trial (NCT01493414) assessed the safety and efficacy of the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in patients with symptomatic MF. This post hoc analysis investigated the impact of BMF grade on response and outcomes in patients with primary MF (PMF) from the JUMP study. BMF was assessed by biopsy and graded from 0 to 3; grades 0-1 were considered low-grade fibrosis (LGF) and grades 2-3 were considered high-grade fibrosis (HGF). Patients with LGF (n = 268) had lower rates of cytopenias at baseline but showed comparable disease burden vs. patients with HGF (n = 852). The proportion of patients achieving a spleen response was greater in the LGF group vs. the HGF group at Week 24 and at any time during the study, while overall survival estimates were improved in patients with LGF vs. patients with HGF. Early initiation of ruxolitinib therapy (within 2 years of diagnosis) was associated with increased response rates in all patients. These results highlight the efficacy of ruxolitinib in symptomatic patients with PMF, with the greatest clinical improvements observed in patients with LGF and in patients who received early treatment.

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.

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.

How I manage anemia related to myelofibrosis and its treatment regimens

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by mutations (most frequently in JAK2, CALR, or MPL), burdensome symptoms, splenomegaly, cytopenia, and shortened life expectancy. In addition to other clinical manifestations, patients with MF often develop anemia, which can either be directly related to MF pathogenesis or a result of MF treatment with Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, such as ruxolitinib and fedratinib. Although symptoms and clinical manifestations can be similar between the 2 anemia types, only MF-related anemia is prognostic of reduced survival. In this review, I detail treatment and patient management approaches for both types of anemia presentations and provide recommendations for the treatment of MF in the presence of anemia.

Analysis of Predictive Factors for Early Response to Ruxolitinib in 320 Patients with Myelofibrosis From the Polish Adult Leukemia Group (PALG) Registry

INTRODUCTION

Ruxolitinib is widely used in myelofibrosis (MF). However, some patients do not optimally respond and require more efficacious treatment. Our analysis aimed to establish predictors of ruxolitinib response.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We designed a multicenter, retrospective analysis of the efficacy of ruxolitinib treatment in patients with MF in 15 Polish hematology centers. As responses to ruxolitinib occur within the first 6 months, we used this point to evaluate the efficacy of treatment. Symptoms response was defined as ≥50% reduction of the MF constitutional symptoms assessed by Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form Total Symptom Score (MPN-SAF TSS). Spleen response was defined as ≥50% reduction of the difference between the spleen's baseline length and the upper limit norm measured by ultrasonography.

RESULTS

320 MF patients were enrolled. At 6 months of therapy, the spleen response was detected in 140 (50%) patients, and symptoms response in 241 patients (76%). Multivariable analysis identified leukocytosis <25 G/L (OR 2.06, 95%CI: 1.12-3.88, P = .0200), and reticulin fibrosis MF 1 (OR 2.22, 95%CI: 1.11-4.46, P = .0249) contributed to better spleen response. The time interval between MF diagnosis and ruxolitinib administration shorter than 3 months, and platelets ≥150 G/L (OR 1.69, 95% CI 1.01-2.83, P = .0466) influenced symptoms response.

CONCLUSION

Establishing predictive factors for ruxolitinib response is particularly important given the potential for new therapies in MF. In patients with a low likelihood of responding to ruxolitinib, using other JAK inhibitors or adding a drug with a different mechanism of action to ruxolitinib may be of clinical benefit.

Management of Myelofibrosis during Treatment with Ruxolitinib: A Real-World Perspective in Case of Resistance and/or Intolerance

The development and approval of ruxolitinib, the first JAK1/2 inhibitor indicated to treat myelofibrosis, has improved patient outcomes, with higher spleen and symptoms responses, improved quality of life, and overall survival. Despite this, several unmet needs remain, including the absence of resistance criteria, suboptimal response, the timing of allogeneic transplant, and the management of patients in case of intolerance. Here, we report the results of the second survey led by the "MPN Lab" collaboration, which aimed to report physicians' perspectives on these topics. As in our first survey, physicians were selected throughout Italy, and we included those with extensive experience in treating myeloproliferative neoplasms and those with less experience representing clinical practice in the real world. The results presented here, summarized using descriptive analyses, highlight the need for a clear definition of response to ruxolitinib as well as recommendations to guide the management of ruxolitinib under specific conditions including anemia, thrombocytopenia, infections, and non-melanoma skin cancers.

The clinical dilemma of JAK inhibitor failure in myelofibrosis: Predictive characteristics and outcomes

Two Janus-associated kinase inhibitors (JAKi) (initially ruxolitinib and, more recently, fedratinib) have been approved as treatment options for patients who have intermediate-risk and high-risk myelofibrosis (MF), with pivotal trials demonstrating improvements in spleen volume, disease symptoms, and quality of life. At the same time, however, clinical trial experiences with JAKi agents in MF have demonstrated a high frequency of discontinuations because of adverse events or progressive disease. In addition, overall survival benefits and clinical and molecular predictors of response have not been established in this population, for which the disease burden is high and treatment options are limited. Consistently poor outcomes have been documented after JAKi discontinuation, with survival durations after ruxolitinib ranging from 11 to 16 months across several studies. To address such a high unmet therapeutic need, various non-JAKi agents are being actively explored (in combination with ruxolitinib in first-line or salvage settings and/or as monotherapy in JAKi-pretreated patients) in phase 3 clinical trials, including pelabresib (a bromodomain and extraterminal domain inhibitor), navitoclax (a B-cell lymphoma 2/B-cell lymphoma 2-xL inhibitor), parsaclisib (a phosphoinositide 3-kinase inhibitor), navtemadlin (formerly KRT-232; a murine double-minute chromosome 2 inhibitor), and imetelstat (a telomerase inhibitor). The breadth of data expected from these trials will provide insight into the ability of non-JAKi treatments to modify the natural history of MF.

Peripheral blasts are associated with responses to ruxolitinib and outcomes in patients with chronic-phase myelofibrosis

Background

The presence of peripheral blasts (PB) is a negative prognostic factor in patients with primary and secondary myelofibrosis (MF) and PB ≥4% was associated with a particularly unfavorable prognosis. Ruxolitinib (RUX) is the JAK1/2 inhibitor most used for treatment of MF‐related splenomegaly and symptoms. Its role has not been assessed in correlation with PB.

Methods

In 794 chronic‐phase MF patients treated with RUX, we evaluated the impact of baseline percentage of PB on response (spleen and symptoms responses) and outcome (RUX discontinuation‐free, leukemia‐free, and overall survival). Three subgroups were compared: PB‐0 (no PB, 61.3%), PB‐4 (PB 1%‐4%, 33.5%), and PB‐9 (PB 5%‐9%, 5.2%).

Results

At 3 and 6 months, spleen responses were less frequently achieved by PB‐4 (P = .001) and PB‐9 (P = .004) compared to PB‐0 patients. RUX discontinuation‐free, leukemia‐free, and overall survival were also worse for PB‐4 and PB‐9 patients (P = .001, P = .002, and P < .001, respectively).

Conclusions

Personalized approaches beyond RUX monotherapy may be useful in PB‐4 and particularly in PB‐9 patients.

In 794 chronic‐phase myelofibrosis patients treated with ruxolitinib, the impact of the baseline percentage of peripheral blasts (PB) on response and outcome was evaluated. Three subgroups were compared: PB‐0 (no PB, 61.3%), PB‐4 (PB 1%‐4%, 33.5%), and PB‐9 (PB 5%‐9%, 5.2%). At 3 and 6 months, spleen responses were less frequently achieved by PB‐4 (P = .001) and PB‐9 (P = .004) compared to PB‐0 patients; ruxolitinib discontinuation‐free, leukemia‐free, and overall survival were also worse for PB‐4 and PB‐9 patients (P = .001, P = .002, and P < .001, respectively).

A prognostic model to predict survival after 6 months of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis

Ruxolitinib (RUX) is extensively used in myelofibrosis (MF). Despite its early efficacy, most patients lose response over time and, after discontinuation, have a worse overall survival (OS). Currently, response criteria able to predict OS in RUX-treated patients are lacking, leading to uncertainty regarding the switch to second-line treatments. In this study, we investigated predictors of survival collected after 6 months of RUX in 209 MF patients participating in the real-world ambispective observational RUXOREL-MF study (NCT03959371). Multivariable analysis identified the following risk factors: (1) RUX dose <20 mg twice daily at baseline, months 3 and 6 (hazard ratio [HR], 1.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-3.00; P = .03), (2) palpable spleen length reduction from baseline ≤30% at months 3 and 6 (HR, 2.26; 95% CI, 1.40-3.65; P = .0009), (3) red blood cell (RBC) transfusion need at months 3 and/or 6 (HR, 1.66; 95% CI, 0.95-2.88; P = .07), and (4) RBC transfusion need at all time points (ie, baseline and months 3 and 6; HR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.19-4.54; P = .02). Hence, we developed a prognostic model, named Response to Ruxolitinib After 6 Months (RR6), dissecting 3 risk categories: low (median OS, not reached), intermediate (median OS, 61 months; 95% CI, 43-80), and high (median OS, 33 months; 95% CI, 21-50). The RR6 model was validated and confirmed in an external cohort comprised of 40 MF patients. In conclusion, the RR6 prognostic model allows for the early identification of RUX-treated MF patients with impaired survival who might benefit from a prompt treatment shift.

Deferasirox in the management of iron overload in patients with myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib: The multicentre retrospective RUX-IOL study

Deferasirox (DFX) is used for the management of iron overload (IOL) in many haematological malignancies including myelofibrosis (MF). The 'RUX-IOL' study retrospectively collected 69 MF patients treated with ruxolitinib (RUX) and DFX for IOL to assess: safety, efficacy in term of iron chelation response (ICR) and erythroid response (ER), and impact on overall survival of the combination therapy. The RUX-DFX therapy was administered for a median time of 12.4 months (interquartile range 3.1-71.2). During treatment, 36 (52.2%) and 34 (49.3%) patients required RUX and DFX dose reductions, while eight (11.6%) and nine (13.1%) patients discontinued due to RUX- or DFX-related adverse events; no unexpected toxicity was reported. ICR and ER were achieved by 33 (47.8%) and 32 patients (46.4%) respectively. Thirteen (18.9%) patients became transfusion-independent. Median time to ICR and ER was 6.2 and 2 months respectively. Patients achieving an ER were more likely to obtain an ICR also (p = 0.04). In multivariable analysis, the absence of leukocytosis at baseline (p = 0.02) and achievement of an ICR at any time (p = 0.02) predicted improved survival. In many MF patients, the RUX-DFX combination provided ICR and ER responses that correlated with improved outcome in the absence of unexpected toxicities. This strategy deserves further clinical investigation.

How We Manage Myelofibrosis Candidates for Allogeneic Stem Cell Transplantation

Moving from indication to transplantation is a critical process in myelofibrosis. Most of guidelines specifically focus on either myelofibrosis disease or transplant procedure, and, currently, no distinct indication for the management of MF candidates to transplant is available. Nevertheless, this period of time is crucial for the transplant outcome because engraftment, non-relapse mortality, and relapse incidence are greatly dependent upon the pre-transplant management. Based on these premises, in this review, we will go through the path of identification of the MF patients suitable for a transplant, by using disease-specific prognostic scores, and the evaluation of eligibility for a transplant, based on performance, comorbidity, and other combined tools. Then, we will focus on the process of donor and conditioning regimens’ choice. The pre-transplant management of splenomegaly and constitutional symptoms, cytopenias, iron overload and transplant timing will be comprehensively discussed. The principal aim of this review is, therefore, to give a practical guidance for managing MF patients who are potential candidates for allo-HCT.

Updated recommendations on the use of ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis

OBJECTIVES

Myelofibrosis is a rare bone marrow disorder associated with a high symptom burden, poor prognosis, and shortened survival. While allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is the only curative treatment for myelofibrosis, the only approved and reimbursed pharmacotherapy for non-HSCT candidates in Belgium is ruxolitinib.

METHODS

These updated recommendations are based on a consensus reached during two meetings and provide guidance for ruxolitinib administration in myelofibrosis patients considering the particularities of Belgian reimbursement criteria.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In Belgium, ruxolitinib is indicated and reimbursed for transplant-ineligible myelofibrosis patients from intermediate-2- and high-risk groups and from the intermediate-1-risk group with splenomegaly. Our recommendation is to also make ruxolitinib available in the pre-transplant setting for myelofibrosis patients with splenomegaly or heavy symptom burden. Before ruxolitinib initiation, complete blood cell counts are recommended, and the decision on the optimal dosage should be based on platelet count and clinical parameters. In anemic patients, we recommend starting doses of ruxolitinib of 10 mg twice daily for 12 weeks and we propose the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in patients with endogenous erythropoietin levels ≤500 mU/mL. Increased vigilance for opportunistic infections and second primary malignancies is needed in ruxolitinib-treated myelofibrosis patients. Ruxolitinib treatment should be continued as long as there is clinical benefit (reduced splenomegaly or symptoms), and we recommend progressive dose tapering when stopping ruxolitinib.

CONCLUSION

Based on new data and clinical experience, the panel of experts discussed ruxolitinib treatment in Belgian myelofibrosis patients with a focus on dose optimization/monitoring, adverse events, and interruption/rechallenge management.

SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions: Identifying and Treating "Progression" in Myelofibrosis

Over the last decade, the Janus kinase (JAK) 1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib has become widely established as the cornerstone of pharmacologic therapy for most patients with myelofibrosis (MF), providing dramatic and durable benefits in terms of splenomegaly and symptoms, and prolonging survival. Ruxolitinib does not address all aspects of the disease, however; notably cytopenias, and its ability to modify the underlying biology of the disease remains in question. Furthermore, patients eventually lose response to ruxolitinib. Multiple groups have reported the median overall survival of MF patients after ruxolitinib discontinuation to be 13 to 14 months. While consensus criteria only recognize splenic and blast progression as "progressive disease" in patients with MF, disease progression can occur in a variety of ways. Besides increasing splenomegaly and progression to accelerated phase/leukemic transformation, patients may develop worsening disease-related symptoms, cytopenias, progressive leukocytosis, extramedullary hematopoiesis, etc. As in the frontline setting, treatment needs to be tailored to the clinical needs of the patient. Current treatment options for patients with MF who fail ruxolitinib remain unsatisfactory, and this continues to represent an area of major unmet medical need. The regulatory approval of fedratinib has introduced an important option in the postruxolitinib setting. Fortunately, a plethora of novel agents, both new JAK inhibitors and drugs from other classes, eg, bromodomain and extraterminal (BET), murine double minute 2 (MDM2) and telomerase inhibitors, activin receptor ligand traps, BH3-mimetics and more, are poised to greatly expand the therapeutic armamentarium for patients with MF if successful in pivotal trials.

Adherence to ruxolitinib, an oral JAK1/2 inhibitor, in patients with myelofibrosis: interim analysis from an Italian, prospective cohort study (ROMEI)

ROMEI, a prospective, observational study in patients with myelofibrosis receiving the oral JAK1/2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in real-world practice, assesses treatment adherence based on the 8-item Morisky Medication Adherence Scale (MMAS-8). Here, we present MMAS-8 results at week 24. Overall, 101 of 188 evaluable patients completed the questionnaire at every visit (full completers). Mean (±standard deviation) total MMAS-8 scores remained stable from week 4 to week 24 in the overall population (7.54 ± 0.77 and 7.67 ± 0.70, respectively) and full completers (7.53 ± 0.79 and 7.67 ± 0.73, respectively). Rates of low (MMAS-8 ˂6) or medium (MMAS-8 ≥ 6 to ˂8) adherence were 25-40% and 26-36%, respectively. Fifty-five full completers (54%) reported ≥1 change in adherence category (improvement and/or worsening), most of which were associated with unintentional behavior. The data suggest that one-third of patients receiving ruxolitinib may be undertreated due to non-adherence, potentially undermining disease control, and indicate a need for better interventions addressing noncompliance to oral therapies.

Comparing the safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients with Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System low-, intermediate-1-, intermediate-2-, and high-risk myelofibrosis in JUMP, a Phase 3b, expanded-access study

Ruxolitinib, a potent Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, has demonstrated durable improvements in patients with myelofibrosis. In this analysis of the Phase 3b JUMP study, which included patients aged ≥18 years with a diagnosis of primary or secondary myelofibrosis, we assessed the safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib in patients stratified by Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System (DIPSS) risk categories. Baseline characteristic data were available to assess DIPSS status for 1844 of the 2233 enrolled patients; 60, 835, 755, and 194 in the low‐, intermediate (Int)‐1‐, Int‐2‐, and high‐risk groups, respectively. Ruxolitinib was generally well tolerated across all risk groups, with an adverse‐event (AE) profile consistent with previous reports. The most common hematologic AEs were thrombocytopenia and anemia, with highest rates of Grade ≥3 events in high‐risk patients. Approximately, 73% of patients experienced ≥50% reductions in palpable spleen length at any point in the ≤24‐month treatment period, with highest rates in lower‐risk categories (low, 82.1%; Int‐1, 79.3%; Int‐2, 67.1%; high risk, 61.6%). Median time to spleen length reduction was 5.1 weeks and was shortest in lower‐risk patients. Across measures, 40%–57% of patients showed clinically meaningful symptom improvements, which were observed from 4 weeks after treatment initiation and maintained throughout the study. Overall survival (OS) was 92% at Week 72 and 75% at Week 240 (4.6 years). Median OS was longer for Int‐2‐risk than high‐risk patients (253.6 vs. 147.3 weeks), but not evaluable in low‐/Int‐1‐risk patients. By Week 240, progression‐free survival (PFS) and leukemia‐free survival (LFS) rates were higher in lower‐risk patients (PFS: low, 90%; Int‐1, 82%; Int‐2, 46%; high risk, 15%; LFS: low, 92%; Int‐1, 86%; Int‐2, 58%; high risk, 19%). Clinical benefit was seen across risk groups, with more rapid improvements in lower risk patients. Overall, this analysis indicates that ruxolitinib benefits lower‐risk DIPSS patients in addition to higher risk.

Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis: a retrospective and multicenter experience in Turkey

Background/aim

The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis.

Materials and methods

From 15 centers, 176 patients (53.4% male, 46.6% female) were retrospectively evaluated.

Results

The median age at ruxolitinib initiation was 62 (28–87) and 100 (56.8%) of all were diagnosed as PMF. Constitutional symptoms were observed in 84.7%. The median initiation dose of ruxolitinib was 30 mg (10–40). Dose change was made in 69 (39.2%) patients. Forty seven (35.6%) and 20 (15.2%) of 132 patients had hematological and nonhematological adverse events, respectively. The mean spleen sizes before and after ruxolitinib treatment were 219.67 ± 46.79 mm versus 199.49 ± 40.95 mm, respectively (p < 0.001). There was no correlation between baseline features and subsequent spleen response. Overall survival at 1-year was 89.5% and the median follow up was 10 (1–55) months. We could not show any relationship between survival and reduction in spleen size (p = 0.73).

Conclusion

We found ruxolitinib to be safe, well tolerated, and effective in real-life clinical practice in Turkey. Ruxolitinib dose titration can provide better responses in terms of not only clinical benefit but also for long term of ruxolitinib treatment.

Efficacy and safety of a novel dosing strategy for ruxolitinib in the treatment of patients with myelofibrosis and anemia: the REALISE phase 2 study

Anemia is a frequent manifestation of myelofibrosis (MF) and there is an unmet need for effective treatments in anemic MF patients. The REALISE phase 2 study (NCT02966353) evaluated the efficacy and safety of a novel ruxolitinib dosing strategy with a reduced starting dose with delayed up-titration in anemic MF patients. Fifty-one patients with primary MF (66.7%), post-essential thrombocythemia MF (21.6%), or post-polycythemia vera MF (11.8%) with palpable splenomegaly and hemoglobin <10 g/dl were included. Median age was 67 (45–88) years, 41.2% were female, and 18% were transfusion-dependent. Patients received 10 mg ruxolitinib b.i.d. for the first 12 weeks, then up-titrations of up to 25 mg b.i.d. were permitted, based on efficacy and platelet counts. Overall, 70% of patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in palpable spleen length at any time during the study. The most frequent adverse events leading to dose interruption/adjustment were thrombocytopenia (17.6%) and anemia (11.8%). Patients who had a dose increase had greater spleen size and higher white blood cell counts at baseline. Median hemoglobin levels remained stable and transfusion requirements did not increase compared with baseline. These results reinforce the notion that it is unnecessary to delay or withhold ruxolitinib because of co-existent or treatment-emergent anemia.

RAS/CBL mutations predict resistance to JAK inhibitors in myelofibrosis and are associated with poor prognostic features

The dysregulation of the JAK/STAT pathway drives the pathogenesis of myelofibrosis (MF). Recently, several JAK inhibitors (JAKis) have been developed for treating MF. Select mutations (MTs) have been associated with impaired outcomes and are currently incorporated in molecularly annotated prognostic models. Mutations of RAS/MAPK pathway genes are frequently reported in cancer and at low frequencies in MF. In this study, we investigated the phenotypic, prognostic, and therapeutic implications of NRASMTs, KRASMTs, and CBLMTs (RAS/CBLMTs) in 464 consecutive MF patients. A total of 59 (12.7%) patients had RAS/CBLMTs: NRASMTs, n = 25 (5.4%); KRASMTs, n = 13 (2.8%); and CBLMTs, n = 26 (5.6%). Patients with RAS/CBLMTs were more likely to present with high-risk clinical and molecular features. RAS/CBLMTs were associated with inferior overall survival compared with patients without MTs and retained significance in a multivariate model, including the Mutation-Enhanced International Prognostic Score System (MIPSS70) risk factors and cytogenetics; however, inclusion of RAS/CBLMTs in molecularly annotated prognostic models did not improve the predictive power of the latter. The 5-year cumulative incidence of leukemic transformation was notably higher in the RAS/CBLMT cohort. Among 61 patients treated with JAKis and observed for a median time of 30 months, the rate of symptoms and spleen response at 6 months was significantly lower in the RAS/CBLMT cohort. Logistic regression analysis disclosed a significant inverse correlation between RAS/CBLMTs and the probability of achieving a symptom or spleen response that was retained in multivariate analysis. In summary, our study showed that RAS/CBLMTs are associated with adverse phenotypic features and survival outcomes and, more important, may predict reduced response to JAKis.