Ruxolitinib in treatment-naive or corticosteroid-refractory paediatric patients with chronic graft-versus-host disease (REACH5): interim analysis of a single-arm, multicentre, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) is a debilitating, and sometimes life threatening, complication of allogeneic haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). We aimed to investigate the activity, pharmacokinetics, and safety of ruxolitinib added to corticosteroids in paediatric patients (ie, <18 years) with moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD. METHODS: In this single-arm, phase 2 study, patients were recruited at 21 hospitals or clinics across 14 countries in Asia, Europe, and Canada. Eligible patients were aged 28 days to younger than 18 years, had undergone allogenic HSCT, and had been diagnosed with treatment-naive or corticosteroid-refractory moderate-to-severe chronic GVHD, per 2014 National Institutes of Health consensus criteria. Patients received oral ruxolitinib dosing on the basis of their age at the start of treatment: those aged 12 years to younger than 18 years received 10 mg twice daily (age ≥12 to <18 years group), those aged 6 years to younger than 12 years (age ≥6 to <12 years group) received 5 mg twice daily, and those aged 2 years to younger than 6 years received 4 mg/m2 twice daily (age ≥2 to <6 years group). Treatment was to be administered in 28-day cycles for approximately 36 months, alongside supportive treatment per institutional guidelines. The primary activity endpoint was overall response rate at cycle 7 day 1. Activity and safety analyses are reported in the full analysis set, which included all patients who received at least one dose of ruxolitinib. Here we report the prespecified interim analysis, scheduled to occur after all patients had completed 1 year of treatment or discontinued treatment, and the results for the primary endpoint evaluation reported here is to be considered final. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03774082, enrolment is complete, and the study is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between May 20, 2020, and Sept 17, 2021, 48 patients were screened, of whom 45 were enrolled and received at least one dose of study drug (median age was 11·0 years [IQR 7·2-14·3], 16 [36%] were female, 29 [64%] were male, 21 [47%] were White, one [2%] was Black or African American, 23 [51%] were Asian, 17 [38%] were treatment-naive, 28 [62%] were corticosteroid-refractory). As of data cutoff (Oct 19, 2022), after a median ruxolitinib exposure of 55·1 weeks (IQR 13·1-75·3), the overall response rate at cycle 7 day 1 was 40·0% (18 of 45; 90% CI 27·7-53·3), with responses seen in seven (41%) of 17 treatment-naive patients and 11 (39%) of 28 corticosteroid-refractory patients. The most common treatment-related adverse events of grade 3 or worse were neutropenia (eight [18%] of 45) and thrombocytopenia (six [13%]). Seven (16%) patients had grade 3 or worse serious treatment-related adverse events; the most common was hyponatraemia (two [4%] of 45). Three (7%) patients died while on-treatment (within 30 days of treatment discontinuation), one due to Aspergillus infection, one due to septic shock, and one due to acute respiratory distress syndrome; none were considered to be related to study drug. INTERPRETATION: Pending final analysis, this study suggests that ruxolitinib is active and well tolerated in both treatment-naive and corticosteroid-refractory patients aged 2 years to younger than 18 years with chronic GVHD, thereby supporting its use in this patient population. The safety profile of ruxolitinib in this patient population is consistent with that of adults. Final analysis of this study will provide further information on the long-term benefits of ruxolitinib in children with chronic GVHD. FUNDING: Novartis.

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.

Pooled analysis of menstrual irregularities from three major clinical studies evaluating everolimus for the treatment of tuberous sclerosis complex.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the impact of everolimus on female fertility, including menstrual irregularities, secondary amenorrhea, and luteinizing and follicle stimulating hormone levels in female patients. DESIGN: A pooled analysis from 3 prospective studies consisting of a core phase (≥6 months) and a long-term follow-up open-label extension. SETTING: One phase 2 single-center and two phase 3 multicenter studies. PARTICIPANTS: Data were obtained from female participants, restricted to those between 10 and 55 years of age, during 1 of 3 of the described clinical trials of everolimus. Patients had received ≥ 1 dose of everolimus. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of fertility events. RESULTS: A total of 43/112 patients (38.4%) experienced at least 1 menstrual irregularity. The most common events were amenorrhea (24.1%) and irregular menstruation (17.0%). Seven patients (6.3%) experienced grade 3/4 amenorrhea. When only the longest duration period of amenorrhea for each patient was considered, the median duration was 291 days. Fifteen patients attained menarche during the treatment period in any of the pooled studies. The mean age of menarche for this group was 12.4 years, similar to that of patients who were postmenarche at study entry (12.2 years). A total of 19/92 patients (20.7%) who were postmenarche at baseline or during the study experienced an irregular menstruation event. An increased luteinizing hormone level was reported as an adverse event in 3/112 patients (3%), and follicle-stimulating hormone levels were within normal limits for these patients. CONCLUSIONS: No new safety concerns emerged regarding endocrine function and menstruation in female patients with tuberous sclerosis complex-associated subependymal giant cell astrocytoma or angiomyolipoma, who were receiving everolimus. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00411619, NCT00789828, NCT00790400.

Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Most cases of hepatocellular carcinoma occur in the Asia-Pacific region, where chronic hepatitis B infection is an important aetiological factor. Assessing the efficacy and safety of new therapeutic options in an Asia-Pacific population is thus important. We did a multinational phase III, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to assess the efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients from the Asia-Pacific region with advanced (unresectable or metastatic) hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: Between Sept 20, 2005, and Jan 31, 2007, patients with hepatocellular carcinoma who had not received previous systemic therapy and had Child-Pugh liver function class A, were randomly assigned to receive either oral sorafenib (400 mg) or placebo twice daily in 6-week cycles, with efficacy measured at the end of each 6-week period. Eligible patients were stratified by the presence or absence of macroscopic vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread (or both), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, and geographical region. Randomisation was done centrally and in a 2:1 ratio by means of an interactive voice-response system. There was no predefined primary endpoint; overall survival, time to progression (TTP), time to symptomatic progression (TTSP), disease control rate (DCR), and safety were assessed. Efficacy analyses were done by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00492752. FINDINGS: 271 patients from 23 centres in China, South Korea, and Taiwan were enrolled in the study. Of these, 226 patients were randomly assigned to the experimental group (n=150) or to the placebo group (n=76). Median overall survival was 6.5 months (95% CI 5.56-7.56) in patients treated with sorafenib, compared with 4.2 months (3.75-5.46) in those who received placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0.68 [95% CI 0.50-0.93]; p=0.014). Median TTP was 2.8 months (2.63-3.58) in the sorafenib group compared with 1.4 months (1.35-1.55) in the placebo group (HR 0.57 [0.42-0.79]; p=0.0005). The most frequently reported grade 3/4 drug-related adverse events in the 149 assessable patients treated with sorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR; 16 patients [10.7%]), diarrhoea (nine patients [6.0%]), and fatigue (five patients [3.4%]). The most common adverse events resulting in dose reductions were HFSR (17 patients [11.4%]) and diarrhoea (11 patients [7.4%]); these adverse events rarely led to discontinuation. INTERPRETATION: Sorafenib is effective for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in patients from the Asia-Pacific region, and is well tolerated. Taken together with data from the Sorafenib Hepatocellular Carcinoma Assessment Randomised Protocol (SHARP) trial, sorafenib seems to be an appropriate option for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

Randomized trial of single compared with tandem high-dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation in patients with chemotherapy-sensitive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare progression-free survival between single and tandem high-dose chemotherapy (HDT) followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation in chemotherapy-sensitive metastatic breast cancer patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between February 1997 and June 2001, 187 patients with complete and partial remission were randomly assigned to receive either one or two cycles of HDT, consisting of thiotepa (125 mg/m2/d for 4 days), cyclophosphamide (1,500 mg/m2/d for 4 days), and carboplatin (200 mg/m2/d for 4 days), followed by autologous stem-cell transplantation. RESULTS: One hundred seventy one of 187 randomly assigned patients completed first HDT, but only 52 of 85 completed the second HDT cycle in the tandem HDT arm. The rate of complete remission on an intent-to-treat-basis was 33% in the single-dose HDT arm and 37% in the tandem HDT arm (P = .48). The median progression-free survival times in single and tandem HDT arms were 9.4 and 11.2 months, respectively (one-sided P = .06; two one-sided P = .12), whereas median overall survival time tended to be greater after single versus tandem HDT (29 v 23.5 months, respectively; P = .4). In a multivariate analysis for progression-free survival, tandem HDT (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.98; P = .03) and achievement of complete remission after induction chemotherapy (HR = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.37 to 0.96; P = .03) were factors for a better progression-free survival, whereas the factor of three or more sites of metastases (HR = 1.66; 95% CI, 1.12 to 2.47; P = .01) was associated with a worse progression-free survival. CONCLUSION: Despite a trend of improved progression-free survival, tandem HDT cannot be recommended for patients with chemotherapy-sensitive metastatic breast cancer because of a trend for shorter overall survival and higher toxicity compared with single HDT.