Zachée, Pierre

LBA7006 Background: PAC is a potent JAK2 inhibitor without significant JAK1 inhibition with minimal myelosuppression in early-phase studies in MF. Methods: The efficacy and safety of daily oral PAC was compared to BAT (2:1 randomization stratified for risk and platelet count). The 10 endpoint was the proportion of ITT patients (pts) achieving ≥ 35% spleen volume reduction (SVR) at week (wk) 24 by centrally reviewed MRI or CT. Secondary endpoints included the proportion achieving ≥ 50% reduction in total symptom score (TSS) at wk 24 using the MPN Symptom Assessment Form. Results: Patients:327 were enrolled (PAC:220, BAT:107), 62% with 10 MF. Median time from diagnosis was 1.12 years (PAC 0.99, BAT 1.60): 32% and 15% had a platelet counts < 100,000/µL or <50,000/ µL; 75% were JAK2V617F positive. Efficacy: The median duration of treatment was 16.2 months PAC and 5.9 months BAT. Sixty-two percent of BAT patients received active disease directed therapy. The SVR rates at week 24 were 19.1% for PAC vs. 4.7% for BAT (p=0.0003) in ITT and 25% vs. 5.9% (p=0.0001) in the evaluable population. 79% of BAT patients crossed over to PAC; 21% had achieved a >35% reduction in spleen volume at data cutoff. TSS composite V1 + V2 response rates were 24.5%for PAC vs. 6.5% for BAT (p<0.0001) by ITT, and were 40.9% vs. 9.9% in evaluable pts (p<0.0001). Efficacy with baseline cytopenias: In pts with <100,000 and <50,000 platelets/μ/L, the SVR rates were 16.7% for PAC vs. 0% for BAT (p=0.009), and 22.9% vs. 0% (p=0.045) by ITT and 23.5% vs. 0% (p=0.007) and 33.3% vs. 0% (p=0.037) in evaluable pts. In RBC transfusion dependent pts, 25.7% of PAC pts became RBC independent vs. 0% of BAT pts (p=0.043). Safety: The most common adverse events (AE) for PAC were diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting; (grade 3 were <5%, <1%, <1% respectively). Hematologic AEs were similar between PAC and BAT. Conclusions: This study demonstrated PAC was well tolerated and induced significant and sustained SVR and symptom control even in patients with severe thrombocytopenia. PAC therapy resulted in RBC transfusion independence in a significant proportion of pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01773187.

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.

AbstractObjectivesPolycythemia vera (PV)‐related symptoms may not be adequately controlled with conventional therapy. This current analysis of the RESPONSE trial evaluated the effects of ruxolitinib compared with standard therapy on quality of life (QoL) and symptoms in patients with PV who were hydroxyurea resistant/intolerant.MethodsIn the previously reported primary analysis, ruxolitinib achieved the primary composite endpoint of hematocrit control and ≥35% reduction in spleen volume at Week 32. The current analysis evaluated patient‐reported outcomes using the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire‐Core 30 (EORTC QLQ‐C30), the Myeloproliferative Neoplasm Symptom Assessment Form (MPN‐SAF), the Pruritus Symptom Impact Scale (PSIS), and the Patient Global Impression of Change (PGIC).ResultsCompared with standard therapy, ruxolitinib was associated with greater improvements in global health status/QoL, functional subscales, and individual symptom scores of the EORTC QLQ‐C30. At Week 32, more patients in the ruxolitinib arm (44%) achieved a ≥10‐point improvement in global health status/QoL vs. standard therapy (9%). Improvements in MPN‐SAF symptom scores were consistent with improvements in EORTC QLQ‐C30, PSIS, and PGIC scores.ConclusionsRuxolitinib provides clinically relevant improvements in QoL and ameliorates symptom burden in patients with PV who are hydroxyurea resistant/intolerant.