Real-world non-interventional long-term post-authorisation safety study of ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis.

Primary objective of this non-interventional, post-authorisation safety study was to provide real-world safety data [incidence of adverse drug reactions (ADRs)/serious adverse events (SAEs)] on adult patients with myelofibrosis exposed/or not exposed to ruxolitinib. Key secondary objectives included the incidence/outcome of events of special interest (bleeding events, serious/opportunistic infections, second primary malignancies, and deaths). Overall, 462 patients were included [prevalent users = 260, new users = 32, non-exposed = 170 (inclusive of ruxolitinib-switch, n = 57)]. The exposure-adjusted incidence rates (per 100 patient-years) of ADRs (19·3 vs. 19·6) and SAEs (25·2 vs. 25·0) were comparable amongst new-users versus prevalent-users cohorts, respectively; most frequent ADRs across all cohorts included thrombocytopenia, anaemia, epistaxis, urinary tract infection, and herpes zoster. Anaemia, pneumonia, general physical health deterioration, sepsis, and death were the most frequent SAEs across all cohorts. Incidence rates of bleeding events (21·6) and serious/opportunistic infections (34·5) were higher in ruxolitinib-switch cohort versus other cohorts. The incidence rate of second primary malignancies was higher in the prevalent-users cohort (10·1) versus other cohorts. The observed safety profile of ruxolitinib in the present study along with the safety findings from the COMFORT/JUMP/EXPAND studies support the use of ruxolitinib for long-term treatment of patients with myelofibrosis.

EXPAND, a dose-finding study of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet counts: 48-week follow-up analysis.

EEXPAND (phase Ib, dose-finding study) evaluated the starting dose of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis with baseline platelet counts of 50-99×109/L. The study consisted of dose-escalation and safety-expansion phases. Based on the baseline platelet counts, patients were assigned to stratum 1 (75-99×109/L) or stratum 2 (50-74×109/L), with the primary objective of determining the maximum safe starting dose (MSSD); key secondary objectives included safety and efficacy. At week 48 data cutoff (stratum 1, n=44; stratum 2, n=25), 24.6% (17 out of 69) of patients were still receiving treatment. The MSSD was established as ruxolitinib 10 mg twice daily in both strata. Thrombocytopenia [grade 4 (stratum 1, n=1; stratum 2, n=2)] was the only reported dose-limiting toxicity (study drug related) at 10 mg twice daily. In the MSSD cohort (stratum 1, n=20; stratum 2, n=18), adverse events (regardless of study drug relationship) led to treatment discontinuation in 15.0% and 33.3% of patients in stratum 1 and stratum 2, respectively, and dose adjustment/interruption in 45.0% and 66.7% of patients in stratum 1 and stratum 2, respectively. Three cases of on-treatment deaths were reported at the MSSD. Spleen response was achieved at week 48 in 33.3% and 30.0% of patients in stratum 1 and stratum 2, respectively. Improvements in the Total Symptom Score were also observed. In this study, ruxolitinib demonstrated acceptable tolerability in both the strata at the MSSD of 10 mg twice daily. (Registered at: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 01317875).

Ruxolitinib in steroid-refractory acute graft-vs-host disease: Japanese subgroup analysis of the randomized REACH2 trial.

Acute graft-versus-host disease (aGvHD) is a major complication after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in Japan and other countries. Nearly one-third of patients do not respond to standard systemic steroid therapy and no standard second-line treatment has been established in Japan. We report efficacy and safety findings of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy (BAT) from a subgroup analysis of the international, phase 3 REACH2 study in Japanese patients with steroid-refractory aGvHD. The primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) at day 28. Overall, 9 patients received ruxolitinib and 21 received BAT. The ORR at day 28 (88.9% vs 52.4%) and durable ORR at day 56 (66.7% vs 28.6%) were higher with ruxolitinib versus BAT. The estimated cumulative incidence of loss of response at 6 months was 12.5% with ruxolitinib and 18.2% with BAT. The median failure-free survival was longer with ruxolitinib versus BAT (2.73 vs 1.25 months). The most common adverse events up to day 28 in the ruxolitinib and BAT groups were anemia (55.6% vs 19.0%) and thrombocytopenia (44.4% vs 4.8%, respectively). Ruxolitinib showed better efficacy outcomes and a consistent safety profile compared with BAT in the Japanese subgroup, and the findings were consistent with overall study results.

Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis and low platelet count (50 × 109/L to <100 × 109/L) at baseline: the final analysis of EXPAND.

Background: Thrombocytopenia is a common feature of myelofibrosis (MF), a myeloproliferative neoplasm driven by dysregulated JAK/STAT signaling; however, pivotal trials assessing the efficacy of ruxolitinib (a JAK1/2 inhibitor) excluded MF patients with low platelet counts (<100 × 109/L). Objectives: Determination of the maximum safe starting dose (MSSD) of ruxolitinib was the primary endpoint, with long-term safety and efficacy as secondary and exploratory endpoints, respectively. Design: EXPAND (NCT01317875) was a phase 1b, open-label, ruxolitinib dose-finding study in patients with MF and low platelet counts (50 to <100 × 109/L). Methods: Patients were stratified according to baseline platelet count into stratum 1 (S1, 75 to <100 × 109/L) or stratum 2 (S2, 50 to <75 × 109/L). Previous analyses established the MSSD at 10 mg twice daily (bid); long-term results are reported here. Results: Of 69 enrolled patients, 38 received ruxolitinib at the MSSD (S1, n = 20; S2, n = 18) and are the focus of this analysis. The incidence of adverse events was consistent with the known safety profile of ruxolitinib, with thrombocytopenia (S1, 50%; S2, 78%) and anemia (S1, 55%; S2, 44%) the most frequently reported adverse events and no new or unexpected safety signals. Substantial clinical benefits were observed for patients in both strata: 50% (10/20) and 67% (12/18) of patients in S1 and S2, respectively, achieved a spleen response (defined as ⩾50% reduction in spleen length from baseline) at any time during the study. Conclusion: The final safety and efficacy results from EXPAND support the use of a 10 mg bid starting dose of ruxolitinib in patients with MF and platelet counts 50 to <100 × 109/L. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01317875.

Safety and efficacy of the combination of sonidegib and ruxolitinib in myelofibrosis: a phase 1b/2 dose-finding study.

The sonidegib and ruxolitinib combination was assessed in an open-label study in JAK inhibitor-naive patients with myelofibrosis (MF). The primary objective of phase 1b was to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and phase 2 was to assess spleen volume reduction at weeks 24 and 48. Fifty patients were enrolled. In the dose-escalation phase (n = 23), doses for sonidegib once daily/ruxolitinib twice daily were 400/10 mg (level 1, n = 8), 400/15 mg (level 2, n = 10), and 400/20 mg (level 3, n = 5). Two patients had dose-limiting toxicity at level 2: increased blood creatine phosphokinase (grades 3 and 4, n = 1 each). MTD/RP2D was determined as sonidegib 400 mg daily + ruxolitinib 20 mg twice daily. In phase 1b expansion and phase 2 stage 1 (n = 27), by weeks 24 and 48, ≥35% reduction in spleen volume was observed in 44.4% and 29.6% patients, respectively. By weeks 24 and 48, 42.0% and 26.0% patients had ≥50% reduction in Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form total symptom score, respectively. Most common treatment-related adverse events (grade 3/4) were increased blood creatine phosphokinase (18%), anemia (14%), and thrombocytopenia (12%). Four deaths were reported due to multiple organ dysfunction syndrome (on-treatment; no relationship with study treatment), acute myeloid leukemia, MF progression, and aspiration pneumonia. Although well tolerated, this combination will not be further developed in MF patients due to modest overall benefit compared with historical ruxolitinib monotherapy. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01787552.

Long-term efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in polycythaemia vera (RESPONSE): 5-year follow up of a phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Polycythaemia vera is a myeloproliferative neoplasm characterised by excessive proliferation of erythroid, myeloid, and megakaryocytic components in the bone marrow due to mutations in the Janus kinase 2 (JAK2) gene. Ruxolitinib, a JAK 1 and JAK 2 inhibitor, showed superiority over best available therapy in a phase 2 study in patients with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. We aimed to compare the long-term safety and efficacy of ruxolitinib with best available therapy in patients with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. METHODS: We report the 5-year results for a randomised, open-label, phase 3 study (RESPONSE) that enrolled patients at 109 sites across North America, South America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region. Patients (18 years or older) with polycythaemia vera who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either ruxolitinib or best available therapy. Patients randomly assigned to the ruxolitinib group received the drug orally at a starting dose of 10 mg twice a day. Single-agent best available therapy comprised hydroxyurea, interferon or pegylated interferon, pipobroman, anagrelide, approved immunomodulators, or observation without pharmacological treatment. The primary endpoint, composite response (patients who achieved both haematocrit control without phlebotomy and 35% or more reduction from baseline in spleen volume) at 32 weeeks was previously reported. Patients receiving best available therapy could cross over to ruxolitinib after week 32. We assessed the durability of primary composite response, complete haematological remission, overall clinicohaematological response, overall survival, patient-reported outcomes, and safety after 5-years of follow-up. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01243944. FINDINGS: We enrolled patients between Oct 27, 2010, and Feb 13, 2013, and the study concluded on Feb 9, 2018. Of 342 individuals screened for eligibility, 222 patients were randomly assigned to receive ruxolitinib (n=110, 50%) or best available therapy (n=112, 50%). The median time since polycythaemia vera diagnosis was 8·2 years (IQR 3·9-12·3) in the ruxolitinib group and 9·3 years (4·9-13·8) in the best available therapy group. 98 (88%) of 112 patients initially randomly assigned to best available therapy crossed over to receive ruxolitinib and no patient remained on best available therapy after 80 weeks of study. Among 25 primary responders in the ruxolitinib group, six had progressed at the time of final analysis. At 5 years, the probability of maintaining primary composite response was 74% (95% CI 51-88). The probability of maintaining complete haematological remission was 55% (95% CI 32-73) and the probability of maintaining overall clinicohaematological responses was 67% (54-77). In the intention-to-treat analysis not accounting for crossover, the probability of survival at 5 years was 91·9% (84·4-95·9) with ruxolitinib therapy and 91·0% (82·8-95·4) with best available therapy. Anaemia was the most common adverse event in patients receiving ruxolitinib (rates per 100 patient-years of exposure were 8·9 for ruxolitinib and 8·8 for the crossover population), though most anaemia events were mild to moderate in severity (grade 1 or 2 anaemia rates per 100 patient-years of exposure were 8·0 for ruxolitinib and 8·2 for the crossover population). Non-haematological adverse events were generally lower with long-term ruxolitinib treatment than with best available therapy. Thromboembolic events were lower in the ruxolitinib group than the best available therapy group. There were two on-treatment deaths in the ruxolitinib group. One of these deaths was due to gastric adenocarcinoma, which was assessed by the investigator as related to ruxolitinib treatment. INTERPRETATION: We showed that ruxolitinib is a safe and effective long-term treatment option for patients with polycythaemia vera who are resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. Taken together, ruxolitinib treatment offers the first widely approved therapeutic alternative for this post-hydroxyurea patient population. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.