Efficacy and Safety of Low Molecular Weight Heparin (Ardeparin Sodium) Compared to Warfarin for the Prevention of Venous Thromboembolism after Total Knee Replacement Surgery: A Double-blind, Dose-ranging Study
SummaryWe performed a double-blind, randomized clinical trial to compare the efficacy and safety of three different subcutaneous (SC) low molecular weight heparin doses (ardeparin sodium 25,35, or 50 anti-XaU/kg twice daily [BID]) to adjusted-dose warfarin (international normalized ratio [INR] = 2.0 to 3.0), as venous thromboembolism prophylaxis after total knee replacement surgery. The primary endpoint was total venous thromboembolism prevalence, defined as deep vein thrombosis discovered at postoperative venography of the operated leg, or symptomatic, objectively-documented pulmonary embolism. Of 860 patients randomized, 680 (79%) had an evaluable venogram or pulmonary embolism. The total venous thromboembolism prevalence was significantly greater among patients prophylaxed with warfarin compared to ardeparin 50 BID (38% vs 27%, p = 0.019); the prevalence among ardeparin 25 BID (37%) and 35 BID (28%) patients was similar to warfarin and ardeparin 50 BID patients, respectively. Overt bleeding occurred in 22 (7.9%) ardeparin 50 BID patients compared to 12 (4.4%) warfarin patients (p = 0.08), and in seven ardeparin 25 and 35 BID patients each (5.2% and 5.0%, respectively). Compared to the warfarin group, blood loss was significantly greater in the ardeparin 50 and 25 BID groups, and not different in the ardeparin 35 BID group. Conclusions: Postoperative, unmonitored, fixed-dose ardeparin 50 anti-Xa U/kg SC BID is significantly more effective than adjusted-dose warfarin for this indication. Although overt bleeding among warfarin and ardeparin 50 BID patients did not differ significantly, ardeparin 50 BID patients had significantly greater blood loss. Ardeparin 35 anti-Xa U/kg SC BID may provide efficacy similar to ardeparin 50 anti-Xa U/kg SC BID but with reduced bleeding.
The efficacy and safety of continued hydroxycarbamide therapy versus switching to ruxolitinib in patients with polycythaemia vera: a randomized, double‐blind, double‐dummy, symptom study (RELIEF)
SummaryThe randomized, double‐blind, double‐dummy, phase 3b RELIEF trial evaluated polycythaemia vera (PV)‐related symptoms in patients who were well controlled with a stable dose of hydroxycarbamide (also termed hydroxyurea) but reported PV‐related symptoms. Patients were randomized 1:1 to ruxolitinib 10 mg BID (n = 54) or hydroxycarbamide (prerandomization dose/schedule; n = 56); crossover to ruxolitinib was permitted after Week 16. The primary endpoint, ≥50% improvement from baseline in myeloproliferative neoplasm ‐symptom assessment form total symptom score cytokine symptom cluster (TSS‐C; sum of tiredness, itching, muscle aches, night sweats, and sweats while awake) at Week 16, was achieved by 43·4% vs. 29·6% of ruxolitinib‐ and hydroxycarbamide‐treated patients, respectively (odds ratio, 1·82; 95% confidence interval, 0·82–4·04; P = 0·139). The primary endpoint was achieved by 34% of a subgroup who maintained their hydroxycarbamide dose from baseline to Weeks 13–16. In a post hoc analysis, the primary endpoint was achieved by more patients with stable screening‐to‐baseline TSS‐C scores (ratio ≤ 2) receiving ruxolitinib than hydroxycarbamide (47·4% vs. 25·0%; P = 0·0346). Ruxolitinib treatment after unblinding was associated with continued symptom score improvements. Adverse events were primarily grades 1/2 with no unexpected safety signals. Ruxolitinib was associated with a nonsignificant trend towards improved PV‐related symptoms versus hydroxycarbamide, although an unexpectedly large proportion of patients who maintained their hydroxycarbamide dose reported symptom improvement.
The clinical benefit of ruxolitinib across patient subgroups: analysis of a placebo‐controlled, Phase III study in patients with myelofibrosis
SummaryMyelofibrosis (MF) patients can present with a wide spectrum of disease characteristics. We analysed the consistency of ruxolitinib efficacy across patient subgroups in the COntrolled MyeloFibrosis Study With ORal JAK Inhibitor Treatment (COMFORT‐I,) a double‐blind trial, where patients with intermediate‐2 or high‐risk MF were randomized to twice‐daily oral ruxolitinib (n = 155) or placebo (n = 154). Subgroups analysed included MF subtype (primary, post‐polycythaemia vera, post‐essential thrombocythaemia), age (≤65, > 65 years), International Prognostic Scoring System risk group, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0, 1, ≥2), JAK2 V617F mutation (positive, negative), baseline haemoglobin level (≥100, <100 g/l), baseline platelet count (100–200 × 109/l, >200 × 109/l), baseline palpable spleen size (≤10, >10 cm), and baseline quartile of spleen volume and Total Symptom Score (TSS; Q1 = lowest, Q4 = highest). Mean percentage change from baseline to week 24 in spleen volume and TSS were calculated for ruxolitinib and placebo in each subgroup. Overall survival was estimated by Kaplan–Meier method according to original randomization group. In ruxolitinib‐treated patients, reductions in spleen volume and TSS and evidence of improved survival relative to placebo across subgroups were consistent with those seen in the COMFORT‐I population, confirming that ruxolitinib is an effective therapy for the spectrum of MF patients studied in COMFORT‐I.