Interferons in the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Interferons are cytokines with immunomodulatory properties and disease-modifying effects that have been used to treat myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) for more than 35 years. The initial use of interferons was limited due to difficulties with administration and a significant toxicity profile. Many of these shortcomings were addressed by covalently binding polyethylene glycol to the interferon structure, which increases the stability, prolongs activity, and reduces immunogenicity of the molecule. In the current therapeutic landscape, pegylated interferons are recommended for use in the treatment of polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia, and primary myelofibrosis. We review recent efficacy, molecular response, and safety data for the two available pegylated interferons, peginterferon alfa-2a (Pegasys) and ropeginterferon alfa-2b-njft (BESREMi). The practical management of interferon-based therapies is discussed, along with our opinions on whether to and how to switch from hydroxyurea to one of these therapies. Key topics and questions related to use of interferons, such as their safety and tolerability, the significance of variant allele frequency, advantages of early treatment, and what the future of interferon therapy may look like, will be examined. Pegylated interferons represent an important therapeutic option for patients with MPNs; however, more research is still required to further refine interferon therapy.

A review of what interferons are and how they are used in the treatment of the myeloproliferative neoplasms polycythemia vera, essential thrombocythemia, and primary myelofibrosis Why was this paper written? This paper was written to summarize the current clinical landscape of the use of interferons for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN). What are interferons and how are they used in MPNs? Interferons are small proteins involved in cellular signaling that have been used to treat MPNs, polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), and primary myelofibrosis (PMF), for more than 35 years. They can have modulatory effects on the immune system and on the fundamental causes of disease. The use of interferons as treatment was initially limited due to difficulties with their administration and the potential for significant adverse effects. Many of these shortcomings were addressed by chemically binding a biocompatible polymer, polyethylene glycol (PEG), to the structure of the interferon, which increases the stability of the protein, prolongs the time during which it is active, and reduces negative effects to the immune system. The combined chemical structure of PEG and interferon (pegylated interferon or peginterferon) is recommended for use in the treatment of PV, ET, and PMF. What topics are discussed in this paper? In this review paper we evaluate the clinical effectiveness and safety of two available pegylated interferons, peginterferon alfa-2a (Pegasys) and ropeginterferon alfa-2b-njft (BESREMi) and discuss the practical clinical management of interferon-based therapies, along with the authors' opinions on whether to and how to switch therapy from hydroxyurea. Key topics and questions related to the use of interferons, such as their safety and tolerability, the significance of their effects on mutated cells, advantages of early treatment, and what the future of interferon therapy may look like, will be examined. What do the findings mean? Pegylated interferons represent an important therapeutic option for patients with MPNs; however, more research is still required to further refine interferon therapy.

Changes in bone marrow fibrosis during momelotinib or ruxolitinib therapy do not correlate with efficacy outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis.

Bone marrow fibrosis (BMF) is a pathological feature of myelofibrosis, with higher grades associated with poor prognosis. Limited data exist on the association between outcomes and BMF changes. We present BMF data from Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor-naive patients from SIMPLIFY-1 (NCT01969838), a double-blind, randomized, phase 3 study of momelotinib vs ruxolitinib. Baseline and week 24 bone marrow biopsies were graded from 0 to 3 as per World Health Organization criteria. Other assessments included Total Symptom Score, spleen volume, transfusion independence status, and hemoglobin levels. Paired samples were available from 144 and 160 patients randomized to momelotinib and ruxolitinib. With momelotinib and ruxolitinib, transfusion independence was achieved by 87% and 44% of patients with BMF improvement of ≥1 grade and 76% and 56% of those with stable/worsening BMF; there was no association between BMF changes and transfusion independence for either arm (momelotinib, p = .350; ruxolitinib, p = .096). Regardless of BMF changes, hemoglobin levels also generally increased on momelotinib but decreased on ruxolitinib. In addition, no associations between BMF changes and spleen (momelotinib, p = .126; ruxolitinib, p = .407)/symptom (momelotinib, p = .617; ruxolitinib, p = .833) outcomes were noted, and no improvement in overall survival was observed with ≥1-grade BMF improvement (momelotinib, p = .395; ruxolitinib, p = .407). These data suggest that the anemia benefit of momelotinib is not linked to BMF changes, and question the use of BMF assessment as a surrogate marker for clinical benefit with JAK inhibitors.

Meaningful Symptomatic Change in Patients With Myelofibrosis From the SIMPLIFY Studies.

OBJECTIVES: Patients with myelofibrosis develop symptoms due to bone marrow fibrosis, systemic inflammation, and/or organomegaly. Alleviating symptoms improves overall quality of life. Clinical trials have historically defined symptom response as a reduction of at least 50% in Total Symptom Score at week 24 compared with baseline. Whether 50% constitutes a meaningful benefit has not been established. This study determined the meaningful change threshold (MCT) for 2 momelotinib phase III trials, SIMPLIFY-1 and SIMPLIFY-2. METHODS: The absolute and percentage MCT was determined using anchor-based methods applied to the modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form v2.0 and Patient Global Impression of Change. MCTs were applied retrospectively to determine responder rates. Generalized estimating equations estimated the treatment-related difference in likelihood of improvement. RESULTS: In SIMPLIFY-1, a Janus kinase inhibitor-naive population, the MCT was 8 points. In SIMPLIFY-2, a previously Janus kinase inhibitor-treated population, the MCT was 6 points. A 32% MCT was determined in both studies, showing that the historic 50% reduction threshold may be a conservative choice. In SIMPLIFY-1, a similar proportion of patients achieved responder status with 24 weeks of momelotinib or ruxolitinib therapy based on the absolute MCT (39% vs 41%, respectively). In SIMPLIFY-2, a significantly greater proportion of patients treated with momelotinib achieved responder states compared with best available therapy based on absolute and percent change MCTs. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that momelotinib provided clinically meaningful symptom benefit for patients with myelofibrosis and provides insight into the appropriateness of the symptom change threshold used in historical studies.

Rusfertide, a Hepcidin Mimetic, for Control of Erythrocytosis in Polycythemia Vera.

BACKGROUND: Polycythemia vera is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by erythrocytosis. Rusfertide, an injectable peptide mimetic of the master iron regulatory hormone hepcidin, restricts the availability of iron for erythropoiesis. The safety and efficacy of rusfertide in patients with phlebotomy-dependent polycythemia vera are unknown. METHODS: In part 1 of the international, phase 2 REVIVE trial, we enrolled patients in a 28-week dose-finding assessment of rusfertide. Part 2 was a double-blind, randomized withdrawal period in which we assigned patients, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive rusfertide or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was a response, defined by hematocrit control, absence of phlebotomy, and completion of the trial regimen during part 2. Patient-reported outcomes were assessed by means of the modified Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN-SAF) patient diary (scores range from 0 to 10, with higher scores indicating greater severity of symptoms). RESULTS: Seventy patients were enrolled in part 1 of the trial, and 59 were assigned to receive rusfertide (30 patients) or placebo (29 patients) in part 2. The estimated mean (±SD) number of phlebotomies per year was 8.7±2.9 during the 28 weeks before the first dose of rusfertide and 0.6±1.0 during part 1 (estimated difference, 8.1 phlebotomies per year). The mean maximum hematocrit was 44.5±2.2% during part 1 as compared with 50.0±5.8% during the 28 weeks before the first dose of rusfertide. During part 2, a response was observed in 60% of the patients who received rusfertide as compared with 17% of those who received placebo (P = 0.002). Between baseline and the end of part 1, rusfertide treatment was associated with a decrease in individual symptom scores on the MPN-SAF in patients with moderate or severe symptoms at baseline. During parts 1 and 2, grade 3 adverse events occurred in 13% of the patients, and none of the patients had a grade 4 or 5 event. Injection-site reactions of grade 1 or 2 in severity were common. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with polycythemia vera, rusfertide treatment was associated with a mean hematocrit of less than 45% during the 28-week dose-finding period, and the percentage of patients with a response during the 12-week randomized withdrawal period was greater with rusfertide than with placebo. (Funded by Protagonist Therapeutics; REVIVE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04057040.).

A randomized, double-blind study of zinpentraxin alfa in patients with myelofibrosis who were previously treated with or ineligible for ruxolitinib: Stage 2 of a phase II trial.

Not available.

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

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

Reappraisal of cardiovascular risk factors in patients with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms.

Cardiovascular (CV) risk factors are important contributors to thrombotic risk in the general population and in patients with chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs). However, the role of CV risk factors is often masked by other disease features that have a strong prognostic impact regarding thrombotic risk in MPN patients. This review summarizes the contemporary knowledge and aspects that have not been addressed or lack consensus in the medical community. We propose multidisciplinary care for MPN patients with CV comorbidities and provide future directions that may be needed to appropriately manage CV risk factors in MPNs.

Patient-reported Outcomes and Quality of Life in Anemic and Symptomatic Patients With Myelofibrosis: Results From the MOMENTUM Study.

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm that typically manifests with debilitating symptoms that progressively worsen, negatively impacting patients' quality of life. Fatigue is a multifactorial and burdensome MF-related symptom due to its severity, persistence, and prevalence, with anemia a contributing factor and major unmet need. Clinical trials of the Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2/activin A receptor type 1 inhibitor momelotinib have shown consistent anemia benefits, in addition to improvements in MF-related symptoms. The phase 3 MOMENTUM trial in symptomatic and anemic patients met its primary end point, with a greater proportion having a Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form (MFSAF) Total Symptom Score (TSS) reduction ≥50% at week 24 with momelotinib versus danazol. To support the positive primary end point result, we conducted longitudinal, responder, and time-to-event analyses of patient-reported outcomes from MOMENTUM, as measured by the MFSAF, European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30), and Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) assessments. These analyses demonstrated rapid and durable response benefits with momelotinib, with achievement of first TSS response by day 29 and continued improvement over time. Improvements favored momelotinib versus danazol for each MFSAF individual item, and greater improvements were observed for disease- and cancer-related fatigue and physical functioning at week 24, with significant results for multiple items/domains across the 3 assessments. These findings are consistent in demonstrating that momelotinib provides substantial symptom benefit.

Optimization of cardiovascular risk factor management in patients with BCR::ABL1 negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms, current knowledge, and perspectives.

The exact prognostic role of cardiovascular (CV) risk factors in patients with BCR::ABL1 negative chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) remains unknown as it is often masked by other MPN-related features that bear strong prognostic impact on thrombotic risk. Therefore, current MPN treatment is not primarily guided by presence of CV risk factors. Treatment of CV risk factors in MPN patients usually mirrors that from the general population, despite the fact that CV risk factors in MPNs have their own specificities. Moreover, the optimal target levels for different metabolic deflections in MPNs (i.e., low-density lipoprotein, serum uric acid, or glycated hemoglobin levels) have not been defined. In the current review, we separately discuss the most important aspects of every individual CV risk factor (arterial hypertension, hyperlipidemia, chronic kidney disease, smoking, diabetes mellitus, hyperuricemia, and obesity and cachexia) in MPNs, summarize recent advances in the field, and propose future directions and research areas which may be needed to appropriately manage CV risk factors in MPNs.

Clinical development and management of adverse events associated with FGFR inhibitors.

Approved fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors include erdafitinib, pemigatinib, and futibatinib. We review the most common toxicities associated with FGFR inhibitors and provide practical advice regarding their management. Hyperphosphatemia can be managed with careful monitoring, dose reduction or interruption, a prophylactic low-phosphate diet, and phosphate-lowering therapy. Ocular adverse events (AEs) are managed by withholding or adjusting the dose of the FGFR inhibitor. Dermatologic AEs include alopecia, which can be managed with minoxidil, and dry skin, which can be treated with moisturizers. Hand-foot syndrome can be prevented by lifestyle changes and managed with moisturizing creams, urea, or salicylic acid. Among gastrointestinal AEs, diarrhea may be managed with loperamide; stomatitis can be managed with baking soda rinses, mucosa-coating agents, and topical anesthetics; and dry mouth may be alleviated with salivary stimulants. Most FGFR inhibitor-associated toxicities are manageable with prophylactic measures and treatments; proactive monitoring is key to ensuring optimal clinical benefits.

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.

Pacritinib is a potent ACVR1 inhibitor with significant anemia benefit in patients with myelofibrosis.

In patients with cytopenic myelofibrosis, treatment with the JAK2/IRAK1 inhibitor pacritinib was associated with anemia benefit in the phase 3 PERSIST-2 study. The impact of pacritinib on transfusion independence (TI) has not been previously described, nor has the mechanism by which pacritinib improves anemia been elucidated. Because it has been previously postulated that inhibition of activin A receptor, type 1 (ACVR1)/activin receptor-like kinase-2 improves anemia in patients with myelofibrosis via suppression of hepcidin production, we assessed the relative inhibitory potency of pacritinib compared with other JAK2 inhibitors against ACVR1. Pacritinib inhibited ACVR1 with greater potency (half-maximal inhibitory concentration [IC50] = 16.7 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 12.7) than momelotinib (IC50 = 52.5 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 3.2), fedratinib (IC50 = 273 nM; Cmax:IC50 = 1.0), or ruxolitinib (IC50 > 1000; Cmax:IC50 < 0.01). Pacritinib's inhibitory activity against ACVR1 was corroborated via inhibition of downstream SMAD signaling in conjunction with marked suppression of hepcidin production. Among patients on PERSIST-2 who were not transfusion independent at baseline based on Gale criteria, a significantly greater proportion achieved TI on pacritinib compared with those treated on best available therapy (37% vs 7%, P = .001), and significantly more had a ≥50% reduction in transfusion burden (49% vs 9%, P < .0001). These data indicate that the anemia benefit of the JAK2/IRAK1 inhibitor pacritinib may be a function of potent ACVR1 inhibition.

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of the pelabresib-ruxolitinib combination vs JAKi monotherapy in myelofibrosis.

Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis) ruxolitinib, fedratinib, and pacritinib are the current standard of care in symptomatic myelofibrosis (MF). However, progressive disease and toxicities frequently lead to JAKi discontinuation. Preclinical data indicate that combining JAK and bromodomain and extraterminal (BET) domain inhibition leads to overlapping effects in MF. Pelabresib (CPI-0610), an oral, small-molecule BET1,2 inhibitor (BETi), in combination with ruxolitinib showed improvements in spleen volume reduction (SVR35) and total symptom score reduction (TSS50) from baseline in the phase 2 MANIFEST study (NCT02158858) in patients with MF. Given the absence of a head-to-head clinical comparison between JAKi monotherapy and JAKi with BETi combination therapy, we performed an unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison analysis to adjust for differences between studies and allow for the comparison of SVR35, TSS50, and TSS measured at several timepoints in arm 3 of MANIFEST (pelabresib with ruxolitinib in JAKi treatment-naive patients with MF), with data from the following JAKi monotherapy studies in JAKi treatment-naive patients: COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II (ruxolitinib), SIMPLIFY-1 (ruxolitinib and momelotinib), and JAKARTA (fedratinib). Response rate ratios >1 were observed for pelabresib with ruxolitinib vs all comparators for SVR35 and TSS50 at week 24. Improvements in TSS were observed as early as week 12 and were durable. These results indicate that pelabresib with ruxolitinib may have a potentially higher efficacy than JAKi monotherapy in JAKi treatment-naive MF.

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

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

Identifying Patients with Polycythemia Vera at Risk of Thrombosis after Hydroxyurea Initiation: The Polycythemia Vera-Advanced Integrated Models (PV-AIM) Project.

Patients with polycythemia vera (PV) are at significant risk of thromboembolic events (TE). The PV-AIM study used the Optum® de-identified Electronic Health Record dataset and machine learning to identify markers of TE in a real-world population. Data for 82,960 patients with PV were extracted: 3852 patients were treated with hydroxyurea (HU) only, while 130 patients were treated with HU and then changed to ruxolitinib (HU-ruxolitinib). For HU-alone patients, the annualized incidence rates (IR; per 100 patients) decreased from 8.7 (before HU) to 5.6 (during HU) but increased markedly to 10.5 (continuing HU). Whereas for HU-ruxolitinib patients, the IR decreased from 10.8 (before HU) to 8.4 (during HU) and was maintained at 8.3 (after switching to ruxolitinib). To better understand markers associated with TE risk, we built a machine-learning model for HU-alone patients and validated it using an independent dataset. The model identified lymphocyte percentage (LYP), neutrophil percentage (NEP), and red cell distribution width (RDW) as key markers of TE risk, and optimal thresholds for these markers were established, from which a decision tree was derived. Using these widely used laboratory markers, the decision tree could be used to identify patients at high risk for TE, facilitate treatment decisions, and optimize patient management.