Health-related quality of life in patients with ß-thalassemia: Data from the phase 3 BELIEVE trial of luspatercept.

BACKGROUND: Patients with transfusion-dependent (TD) ß-thalassemia require long-term red blood cell transfusions (RBCTs) that lead to iron overload, impacting health-related quality of life (HRQoL). METHODS: The impact of luspatercept, a first-in-class erythroid maturation agent, versus placebo on HRQoL of patients with TD ß-thalassemia was evaluated in the phase 3 BELIEVE trial. HRQoL was assessed at baseline and every 12 weeks using the 36-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) and Transfusion-dependent Quality of Life questionnaire (TranQol). Mean change in HRQoL was evaluated from baseline to week 48 for patients receiving luspatercept + best supportive care (BSC) and placebo + BSC and between luspatercept responders and non-responders. RESULTS: Through week 48, for both groups, mean scores on SF-36 and TranQol domains were stable over time and did not have a clinically meaningful change. At week 48, more patients who achieved clinical response (≥50% reduction in RBCT burden over 24 weeks) in the luspatercept + BSC group had improvement in SF-36 Physical Function compared with placebo + BSC (27.1% vs. 11.5%; p = .019). CONCLUSIONS: Luspatercept + BSC reduced transfusion burden while maintaining patients' HRQoL. HRQoL domain improvements from baseline through 48 weeks were also enhanced for luspatercept responders.

REMS pharmacy tasks: The adoption of an innovative electronic support system.

OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacy adoption rates of an online Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) Pharmacy Portal designed as an alternative for REMS-certified pharmacies to perform mandatory pharmacy dispense confirmations and to assess whether Pharmacy Portal uptake was affected by the pharmacy daily dispense volume. SETTING: REMS-certified pharmacies dispensing lenalidomide (Revlimid), pomalidomide (Pomalyst), or thalidomide (Thalomid). PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: Primarily specialty and hospital pharmacies in the limited distribution network that used the REMS Pharmacy Portal. PRACTICE INNOVATION: A self-service pharmacy portal was developed to allow REMS-certified pharmacies to obtain confirmation numbers instead of calling a Celgene Customer Care Representative (CCR) or using the Interactive Voice Response System (IVR) system. EVALUATION: The numbers of pharmacy dispense confirmations obtained were identified, and the mean percentages by quarter (Q) were calculated from January 2013 through August 2016 for the Pharmacy Portal, Celgene CCR, and IVR. RESULTS: In Q1 2013, the CCR and IVR options were used for 57% and 43% of dispense confirmations, respectively. After the training period, the Pharmacy Portal rapidly became the most used option (67% of confirmations from Q2 2014). By August 2016, data displayed the continued preference for the pharmacy portal (98% of all confirmations) regardless of the daily dispense volume of the pharmacy. As of March 30, 2018, the pharmacy portal continued to be the preferred option for all pharmacies (maintained at 98.5% use). CONCLUSION: There is an overwhelming REMS pharmacy preference to use the pharmacy portal over the IVR and CCR options, irrespective of the pharmacy daily dispense volume. The rapid uptake of the pharmacy portal is most likely attributed to robust and comprehensive 1-on-1 training and support provided by the REMS sponsor to the REMS-certified pharmacies, but also because it might be easier to use than the other options, resulting in reduced REMS burden for the pharmacy.

Luspatercept for the treatment of anaemia in non-transfusion-dependent ß-thalassaemia (BEYOND): a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In patients with non-transfusion-dependent ß-thalassaemia, haemoglobin concentrations lower than 10 g/dL are associated with a higher risk of morbidity, mortality, and impaired quality of life. No drugs are specifically approved for anaemia management in patients with non-transfusion-dependent ß-thalassaemia, other than transfusion therapy administered infrequently in accordance with patients' needs. We assessed the efficacy and safety of luspatercept versus placebo in patients with non-transfusion-dependent ß-thalassaemia. METHODS: We did a phase 2, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled trial in 12 centres in six countries (Thailand [n=1], Lebanon [n=1], Greece [n=2], Italy [n=5], the UK [n=1], and the USA [n=2]). Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older, had confirmed diagnosis of ß-thalassaemia or haemoglobin E/ß-thalassaemia (concomitant α-globin deletion, mutation, or duplication were allowed), and a baseline haemoglobin concentration of 10·0 g/dL or lower. All patients were non-transfusion-dependent. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to luspatercept or placebo using an interactive response technology system and stratified by baseline haemoglobin concentration (≥8·5 g/dL vs <8·5 g/dL) and baseline Non-Transfusion-Dependent ß-thalassaemia-Patient-Reported Outcome Tiredness/Weakness domain score (≥3 vs <3). All patients, study site staff, and sponsor representatives (who reviewed the data), except for designated individuals, were masked to drug assignment until the time the study was unblinded. Luspatercept or placebo was given once subcutaneously every 3 weeks for 48 weeks in the double-blind treatment period. Luspatercept was started at 1·0 mg/kg with titration up to 1·25 mg/kg, or reduction in the event of toxicity or excessive haemoglobin concentration increase. The primary endpoint was achievement of an increase from baseline of 1·0 g/dL or higher in mean haemoglobin concentration over a continuous 12-week interval during weeks 13-24, in the absence of transfusions. The primary efficacy and safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03342404, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 5, 2018, and Oct 14, 2019, 160 patients were screened for eligiblity, of whom 145 were randomly assigned to luspatercept (n=96) or placebo (n=49). 82 (57%) patients were female and 63 (43%) were male. 44 (30%) patients were Asian, 87 (60%) were White, and 14 (10%) identified as another race. The study met its primary endpoint: 74 (77%) of 96 patients in the luspatercept group and none in the placebo group had an increase of at least 1·0 g/dL in haemoglobin concentration (common risk difference 77·1 [95% CI 68·7-85·5]; p<0·0001). The proportion of patients with serious adverse events was lower in the luspatercept group than in the placebo group (11 [12%] vs 12 [25%]). Treatment-emergent adverse events most commonly reported with luspatercept were bone pain (35 [37%]), headache (29 [30%]), and arthralgia (28 [29%]). No thromboembolic events or deaths were reported during the study. INTERPRETATION: Luspatercept represents a potential treatment for adult patients with non-transfusion-dependent ß-thalassaemia, for whom effective approved treatment options are scarce. FUNDING: Celgene and Acceleron Pharma.

Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes in Patients with Myelodysplastic Syndromes with Ring Sideroblasts Treated with Luspatercept in the MEDALIST Phase 3 Trial.

Patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) often experience chronic anemia and long-term red blood cell transfusion dependence associated with significant burden on clinical and health-related quality of life (HRQoL) outcomes. In the MEDALIST trial (NCT02631070), luspatercept significantly reduced transfusion burden in patients with lower-risk MDS who had ring sideroblasts and were refractory to, intolerant to, or ineligible for prior treatment with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents. We evaluated the effect of luspatercept on HRQoL in patients enrolled in MEDALIST using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and the QOL-E questionnaire. Change in HRQoL was assessed every 6 weeks in patients receiving luspatercept with best supportive care (+ BSC) and placebo + BSC from baseline through week 25. No clinically meaningful within-group changes and between-group differences across all domains of the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QOL-E were observed. On one item of the QOL-E MDS-specific disturbances domain, patients treated with luspatercept reported marked improvements in their daily life owing to the reduced transfusion burden, relative to placebo. Taken together with previous reports of luspatercept + BSC reducing transfusion burden in patients from baseline through week 25 in MEDALIST, these results suggest luspatercept may offer a treatment option for patients that reduces transfusion burden while providing stability in HRQoL.

Hematologic response to three alternative dosing schedules of azacitidine in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes.

PURPOSE: Azacitidine (AZA) is effective treatment for myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) at a dosing schedule of 75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 7 days every 4 weeks. The initial phase of this ongoing multicenter, community-based, open-label study evaluated three alternative AZA dosing schedules without weekend dosing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MDS patients were randomly assigned to one of three regimens every 4 weeks for six cycles: AZA 5-2-2 (75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days, followed by 2 days no treatment, then 75 mg/m(2)/d for 2 days); AZA 5-2-5 (50 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days, followed by 2 days no treatment, then 50 mg/m(2)/d for 5 days); or AZA 5 (75 mg/m(2)/d subcutaneously for 5 days). RESULTS: Of patients randomly assigned to AZA 5-2-2 (n = 50), AZA 5-2-5 (n = 51), or AZA 5 (n = 50), most were French-American-British (FAB) lower risk (refractory anemia [RA]/RA with ringed sideroblasts/chronic myelomonocytic leukemia with < 5% bone marrow blasts, 63%) or RA with excess blasts (30%), and 79 (52%) completed > or = six treatment cycles. Hematologic improvement (HI) was achieved by 44% (22 of 50), 45% (23 of 51), and 56% (28 of 50) of AZA 5-2-2, AZA 5-2-5, and AZA 5 arms, respectively. Proportions of RBC transfusion-dependent patients who achieved transfusion independence were 50% (12 of 24), 55% (12 of 22), and 64% (16 of 25), and of FAB lower-risk transfusion-dependent patients were 53% (nine of 17), 50% (six of 12), and 61% (11 of 18), respectively. In the AZA 5-2-2, AZA 5-2-5, and AZA 5 groups, 84%, 77%, and 58%, respectively, experienced > or = 1 grade 3 to 4 adverse events. CONCLUSION: All three alternative dosing regimens produced HI, RBC transfusion independence, and safety responses consistent with the currently approved AZA regimen. These results support AZA benefits in transfusion-dependent lower-risk MDS patients.

Further analysis of trials with azacitidine in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome: studies 8421, 8921, and 9221 by the Cancer and Leukemia Group B.

PURPOSE: Within the last two decades, a new understanding of the biology of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) has developed. With this understanding, new classification systems, such as the WHO diagnostic criteria, and the International Prognostic Scoring System and response criteria guidelines reported by the International Working Group (IWG) have been developed. We report the combined results of three previously reported clinical trials (n = 309) with azacitidine using the WHO classification system for MDS and acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and IWG criteria for response. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Data from three sequential Cancer and Leukemia Group B trials with azacitidine were recollected and reanalyzed as part of the New Drug Application process. The trials were conducted with either intravenous or subcutaneous azacitidine (75 mg/m2/d for 7 days every 28 days). RESULTS: Complete remissions were seen in 10% to 17% of azacitidine-treated patients; partial remissions were rare; 23% to 36% of patients had hematologic improvement (HI). The median number of cycles to first response was three, and 90% of responses were seen by cycle 6. Using current WHO criteria, 103 patients had AML at baseline; 35% to 48% had HI or better responses. The median survival time for the 27 AML patients randomly assigned to azacitidine was 19.3 months compared with 12.9 months for the 25 patients assigned to observation. Furthermore, azacitidine did not increase the rate of infection or bleeding above the rate caused by underlying disease. CONCLUSION: Azacitidine provides important clinical benefits for patients with high-risk MDS.