Search

Kris Vaddi,1 Srdan Verstovsek,2 Jean-Jacques Kiladjian3 1Drug Discovery, Incyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE, 2Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA; 3Clinical Investigations Center, Hôpital Saint-Louis et Université Paris Diderot, Paris, France Abstract: Polycythemia vera (PV) is a chronic myeloproliferative neoplasm characterized by erythrocytosis and the presence of Janus kinase (JAK) 2V617F or similar mutations. This review summarizes the pathophysiology of PV, the challenges associated with traditional treatment options, and the scientific rationale and supportive clinical evidence for targeted therapy with ruxolitinib. Accumulating evidence indicates that activating mutations in JAK2 drive the PV disease state. Traditional PV treatment strategies, including aspirin, phlebotomy, and cytoreductive agents such as hydroxyurea, provide clinical benefits for some but not all patients and may not adequately treat PV-related symptoms. Furthermore, traditional treatment approaches are associated with potential side effects that may limit their usage and lead some patients to discontinue the treatment. Ruxolitinib is an orally available small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that is a potent and selective inhibitor of JAK1/JAK2. Ruxolitinib is approved in the US for patients with PV with an inadequate response or intolerance to hydroxyurea and in Europe for adults with PV who are resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea. In the Phase III RESPONSE registration trial, ruxolitinib was superior to the best available therapy in patients with PV who were resistant to or intolerant of hydroxyurea in controlling hematocrit levels, reducing spleen volume, and improving PV-related symptoms and quality-of-life measures. The most common nonhematologic adverse events in ruxolitinib-treated patients were headache, diarrhea, pruritus, and fatigue in the RESPONSE trial; hematologic adverse events were primarily grade 1 or 2. In the Phase IIIb nonregistration RELIEF trial, there were nonsignificant trends toward an improved symptom control in patients with PV on a stable hydroxyurea dose who were generally well controlled but reported disease-associated symptoms and switched to ruxolitinib vs those who continued hydroxyurea therapy. Updated treatment guidelines will be important for educating physicians about the role of ruxolitinib in the treatment of patients with PV. Keywords: myeloproliferative disorder, polycythemia vera, Janus kinase inhibitor

Background: Treatment options for myelofibrosis are limited. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib, a potent and selective Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, as compared with the best available therapy, in patients with myelofibrosis.Methods: We assigned 219 patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis, or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis to receive oral ruxolitinib or the best available therapy. The primary end point and key secondary end point of the study were the percentage of patients with at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48 and at week 24, respectively, as assessed with the use of magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography.Results: A total of 28% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group had at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 48, as compared with 0% in the group receiving the best available therapy (P<0.001); the corresponding percentages at week 24 were 32% and 0% (P<0.001). At 48 weeks, the mean palpable spleen length had decreased by 56% with ruxolitinib but had increased by 4% with the best available therapy. The median duration of response with ruxolitinib was not reached, with 80% of patients still having a response at a median follow-up of 12 months. Patients in the ruxolitinib group had an improvement in overall quality-of-life measures and a reduction in symptoms associated with myelofibrosis. The most common hematologic abnormalities of grade 3 or higher in either group were thrombocytopenia and anemia, which were managed with a dose reduction, interruption of treatment, or transfusion. One patient in each group discontinued treatment owing to thrombocytopenia, and none discontinued owing to anemia. Nonhematologic adverse events were rare and mostly grade 1 or 2. Two cases of acute myeloid leukemia were reported with the best available therapy.Conclusions: Continuous ruxolitinib therapy, as compared with the best available therapy, was associated with marked and durable reductions in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms, improvements in role functioning and quality of life, and modest toxic effects. An influence on overall survival has not yet been shown. (Funded by Novartis Pharmaceuticals; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00934544.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BCR::ABL1-negative myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are clonal hematological malignancies resulting from the proliferation of myeloid cells harboring a JAK-STAT pathway activating driver mutation. MPN management recommendations are based on the evaluation of different risks to prevent disease evolution associated events while preserving patients' quality of life. Such risks can be common across all MPN or specific to each subtype (polycythemia vera (PV), essential thrombocythemia (ET), prefibrotic myelofibrosis (pre-MF), primary myelofibrosis (PMF)). MF-patients harbor the worse prognosis and hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is the only curative treatment, at the expense of a high morbi-mortality. Therefore, accurate scoring systems to estimate overall survival are crucial for MF patients' management and selection for HSCT. In PV and ET, vascular events prediction is prioritized given their higher incidence and related morbi-mortality. Finally, quality of life evaluation is important for all subtypes. To predict these risks and adapt MPN therapeutic strategies, clinical risk scores have been developed over the past decades, more recently including molecular risk factors for more accurate risk stratification. The large number of scoring systems available in combination with disease heterogeneity and the necessity to predict diverse outcomes, make it difficult for clinicians to choose the most appropriate score to evaluate their patients' risk in 2024. Here, we provide an overview of MPN disease evolution associated events incidence and conduct an exhaustive comparative review of the scoring systems currently available for each risk. Finally, we propose an algorithm for the use of these scores in clinical practice in each MPN subtype., (Copyright © 2024 American Society of Hematology.)

Despite the advances in the understanding and treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasm (MPN), the disease remains incurable with the risk of evolution to AML or myelofibrosis (MF). Unfortunately, the evolution of the disease to MF remains still poorly understood impeding preventive and therapeutic options. Recent studies in solid tumor microenvironment and organ fibrosis have shed instrumental insights on their respective pathogenesis and drug resistance, yet such precise data are lacking in MPN. In this study, through a patient-sample driven transcriptomic and epigenetic description of the MF microenvironment landscape and cell-based analyses, we identify HOXB7 overexpression and more precisely a novel TGFβ-Wnt-HOXB7 pathway as associated to a pro-fibrotic and pro-osteoblastic biased differentiation of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs). Using gene-based and chemical inhibition of this pathway we reverse the abnormal phenotype of MSCs from myelofibrosis patients, providing the MPN field with a potential novel target to prevent and manage evolution to MF.

Abstract: With emerging new drugs in myelofibrosis (MF), a robust and harmonized framework for defining the severity of anemia and response to treatment will enhance clinical investigation and facilitate interstudy comparisons. Accordingly, the lead authors on the 2013 edition of the International Working Group-European LeukemiaNet (IWG-ELN) response criteria in MF were summoned to revise their document with the intent to (1) account for gender-specific differences in determining hemoglobin levels for eligibility criteria; (2) revise the definition of transfusion-dependent anemia (TDA) based on current restrictive transfusion practices; and (3) provide a structurally simple and easy to apply response criteria that are sensitive enough to detect efficacy signals (minor response) and also account for major responses. The initial draft of the 2024 IWG-ELN proposed criteria was subsequently circulated around a wider group of international experts and their feedback incorporated. The proposed articles include new definitions for TDA (≥3 units in the 12 weeks before study enrollment) and hemoglobin thresholds for eligibility criteria (<10 g/dL for women and <11 g/dL for men). The revised document also provides separate (TDA vs non-TDA) and graded (major vs minor response) response criteria while preserving the requirement for a 12-week period of screening and observation on treatment., (© 2024 American Society of Hematology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights are reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Spleen volume reduction (SVR) is a key endpoint in inhibitors of Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor studies. Retrospective analyses have demonstrated an association between SVR and improved overall survival (OS) among patients treated with ruxolitinib with a platelet count > 100 × 10 9 /L. Whether this association occurs in patients with thrombocytopenia is unclear. Pacritinib, a JAK2/IRAK1/ACVR1 inhibitor, demonstrated improved SVR versus best available therapy (BAT [best available therapy]; including ruxolitinib) in patients with myelofibrosis and platelet counts ≤ 100 × 10 9 /L in the PERSIST-2 study. Patients on study at the start of the 12-week SVR window on pacritinib 200 mg twice daily or BAT were included. OS was evaluated among SVR responders versus non-responders using different SVR thresholds (≥ 35%, ≥ 20%, ≥ 10%, and > 0%). Among patients on pacritinib (n = 89), SVR ≥ 10% demonstrated the greatest separation in OS curves between responders and non-responders (HR, 0.00; 95% CI, 0.00-0.14; p < 0.01), though SVR ≥ 0% and SVR ≥ 20% were also associated with improved OS. No SVR threshold conferred OS benefit on BAT (n = 84), including ruxolitinib (n = 39). In patients with myelofibrosis and platelets ≤ 100 × 10 9 /L, achieving SVR on pacritinib, but not BAT (including ruxolitinib), was associated with significant OS benefit, suggesting that pacritinib may offer a unique survival advantage in patients with myelofibrosis and thrombocytopenia who achieve any SVR. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02055781., (© 2024 The Author(s). European Journal of Haematology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In addition to high-molecular risk (HMR) mutations (ASXL1, EZH2, SRSF2, IDH, and U2AF1 Q157 ), lower JAK2V617F variant allele frequencies (VAF) have been demonstrated to be associated with poor prognosis of myelofibrosis (MF) patients. Nevertheless, the relationship between JAK2V617F VAF and HMR mutations remains inconclusive. To address this, we analyzed the mutation status of 54 myeloid neoplasm-relevant genes using targeted next-generation sequencing in 124 MF patients. Three cohorts from multiple international centers were analyzed for external validation. Among JAK2-mutated patients, the presence of HMR mutations drove poor prognosis in patients with lower JAK2V617F VAF but not in those with higher JAK2V617F VAF. Survival analyses showed consistent results across validation cohorts. In multivariable analysis, concurrent HMR and a lower JAK2V617F VAF was identified as an independent adverse prognostic factor for survival, irrespective of age, MIPSS70, MIPSS70 + v2, and GIPSS risk groups. Mutation co-occurrence tests revealed no shared mutational pattern over different cohorts, excluding potential confounding effect from other concurrent mutations. Importantly, the integration of HMR/JAK2V617F VAF (≤50%) status significantly enhanced existing prognostic models, as evidenced by higher c-indexes and time-dependent ROC analyses. Single-cell studies with sequential follow-ups are warranted to decipher the clonal evolution of MF and how it relates to JAK2V617F VAF dynamics., (© 2024. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are characterized by an increased production of blood cells due to the acquisition of mutations such as JAK2 V617F . TGF-β, whose secretion is increased in MPN patients, is known to negatively regulate haematopoietic stem cell (HSC) proliferation. Using an isogenic JAK2 V617F or JAK2 wild-type UT-7 cell line we observed that JAK2 V617F cells resist to TGF-β antiproliferative activity. Although TGF-β receptors and SMAD2/3 expressions are similar in both cell types, TGF-β-induced phosphorylation of SMAD2/3 is reduced in UT-7 JAK2 V617F cells compared with JAK2 WT cells. We confirmed that JAK2 V617F mutated cells are resistant to the antiproliferative effect of TGF-β in a competitive assay as we observed a positive selection of JAK2 V617F cells when exposed to TGF-β. Using cell lines, CD34-positive cells from MPN patients and bone marrow cells from JAK2 V617F knock-in mice we identified a down regulation of the SHP-1 phosphatase, which is required for the regulation of HSC quiescence by TGF-β. The transduction of SHP-1 cDNA (but not a phosphatase inactive cDNA) restores the antiproliferative effect of TGF-β in JAK2 V617F mutated cells. Finally, SC-1, a known agonist of SHP-1, antagonized the selection of JAK2 V617F mutated cells in the presence of TGF-β. In conclusion, we show a JAK2-dependent down regulation of SHP-1 in MPN patients' cells which is related to their resistance to the antiproliferative effect of TGF-β. This may participate in the clonal selection of cancer cells in MPNs., (© 2024 The Author(s). Journal of Cellular and Molecular Medicine published by Foundation for Cellular and Molecular Medicine and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Most patients with myelofibrosis develop ruxolitinib intolerance or disease that is relapsed or refractory, and survival rates after ruxolitinib discontinuation are poor. We aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of fedratinib versus best available therapy (BAT) in patients with myelofibrosis previously treated with ruxolitinib., Methods: FREEDOM2 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 3 trial in 86 clinics in 16 countries, in which patients aged at least 18 years with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis that was relapsed or refractory or intolerant to ruxolitinib with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2 were stratified by spleen size by palpation, platelet count, and previous ruxolitinib treatment, and randomly assigned 2:1 by interactive response technology to receive fedratinib 400 mg per day (4 × 100 mg capsules orally once daily, open-label) or BAT. Patients received prophylactic antiemetics and thiamine supplementation, and symptomatic antidiarrhoeals as required. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients reaching spleen volume reduction (SVR) of at least 35% (SVR35) at end of cycle 6 in the intention-to-treat population. This manuscript reports the primary analysis of the trial; follow-up is ongoing. This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03952039., Findings: Between Sept 9, 2019 and June 24, 2022, of 316 patients screened, 201 were randomly assigned and treated (134 to fedratinib, 67 to BAT [including 52 receiving ruxolitinib]); 46 patients from the BAT group crossed over to fedratinib. Approximately half of enrolled patients were male (fedratinib 75 [56%] of 134; BAT 30 [45%] of 67) and most were White (fedratinib 106 [79%] of 134; BAT 58 [87%] of 67). At data cutoff (Dec 27, 2022), median survival follow-up was 64·5 weeks (IQR 37·9-104·9). SVR35 at end of cycle 6 was seen in 48 (36%) of 134 patients receiving fedratinib versus four (6%) of 67 patients receiving BAT (30% difference; 95% CI 20-39; one-sided p-value <0·0001). During the first six cycles 53 (40%) of 134 patients in the fedratinib group and 8 (12%) of 67 patients in the BAT group had grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events, most frequently anaemia (fedratinib 12 [9%] of 134; BAT 6 [9%] of 67) and thrombocytopenia (fedratinib 16 [12%] of 134; BAT 2 [3%] of 67); one patient in the fedratinib group died from acute kidney injury suspected to be related to study drug (no treatment-related deaths in the BAT group). Gastrointestinal adverse events occurred more frequently in the fedratinib group compared with the BAT group, but were mostly grade 1-2 in severity and more frequent in early cycles, and were less frequent than in prior clinical trials. A total of 28 (21%) of 134 patients in the fedratinib group and 3 (4%) of 67 patients in the BAT group had thiamine levels below lower limit of normal per central laboratory assessment, with only one case of low thiamine in the fedratinib arm after the introduction of prophylactic thiamine supplementation., Interpretation: Findings from FREEDOM2 support fedratinib as a second-line Janus kinase inhibitor option to reduce spleen size after ruxolitinib failure or intolerance in patients with myelofibrosis, and shows effective strategies for management of gastrointestinal adverse events and low thiamine concentrations through prophylaxis, monitoring, and treatment., Funding: Bristol Myers Squibb., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests CNH reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Constellation–Morphosys, and Novartis; consulting fees from Galecto, Geron, and GlaxoSmithKline; honoraria from AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb–Celgene, CTI BioPharma, Galacteo, Geron, Gilead, IMAGO, Janssen, Keros, Novartis, Promedior, Roche, Shire, and Sierra; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Galacteo and Keros; and leadership at the European Hematology Association. RM reports honoraria from AbbVie, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI BioPharma, Genentech, Geron, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Morphosys, Novartis, Sierra Oncology, and Telios. MT reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb; travel support from Sumitomo; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and Sumitomo; and leadership in the Society of Hematologic Oncology. HKA-A reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, and Novartis; travel support from AbbVie and Bristol Myers Squibb; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with AbbVie, AOP Health, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis, and SGK. FPas reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb–Celgene; consulting fees from AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb–Celgene, Kartos, Karyopharma, Kyowa Kirin–MEI, Novartis, Roche, Sierra Oncology, and Sumitomo; and honoraria from AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb–Celgene, Novartis, and Roche. FPal reports research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb; honoraria from AbbVie, Amgen, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI BioPharma, GlaxoSmithKline, Kartos, Novartis, and Telios; travel support from AbbVie and Novartis; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI BioPharma, GlaxoSmithKline, and Novartis. GB reports honoraria and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Bristol Myers Squibb, Janssen, and Novartis. AMV reports honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Geron, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, and Novartis; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Bristol Myers Squibb, Geron, Incyte, and Novartis. CM reports research funding from AbbVie and Bristol Myers Squibb; and honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, and Novartis. AI reports honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Incyte, Novartis, and Pfizer; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, Novartis, and Pfizer. PB reports employment and stock or stock options with Bristol Myers Squibb. CH reports employment with Bristol Myers Squibb. SR reports employment and stock or stock options with Bristol Myers Squibb. JW reports employment with Bristol Myers Squibb. J-JK reports consulting fees from AbbVie and GlaxoSmithKline; honoraria from AOP Health and Novartis; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board with Bristol Myers Squibb and Incyte. BX and IK report no competing interests., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved, including those for text and data mining, AI training, and similar technologies.)

Abstract: The ACE-536-MF-001 trial enrolled patients with myelofibrosis (n = 95) into 4 cohorts: patients in cohorts 1 and 3A were non-transfusion dependent (NTD) and had anemia; patients in cohorts 2 and 3B were transfusion dependent (TD); and patients in cohort 3A/3B had stable ruxolitinib treatment before and during the study. All patients received luspatercept (1.0-1.75 mg/kg, 21-day cycles). Treatment was extended if clinical benefit was observed at day 169. The primary end point was anemia response rate (NTD, ≥1.5 g/dL hemoglobin increase from baseline; TD, transfusion-independence) over any 12-week period during the primary treatment period (weeks 1-24). Overall, 14% of patients in cohorts 1 and 3A, 10% in cohort 2, and 26% in cohort 3B met the primary end point. In cohorts 1 and 3A (NTD), 27% and 50% of patients, respectively, had mean hemoglobin increase of ≥1.5 g/dL from baseline. Among TD patients, ∼50% had ≥50% reduction in transfusion burden. Reduction in total symptom score was observed in all cohorts, with the greatest response rate seen in cohort 3A. Overall, 94% of patients had ≥1 adverse event (AE); 47% had ≥1 treatment-related AE (TRAE; 11% grade ≥3), most frequently hypertension (18%), managed with medical intervention. One patient had a serious TRAE leading to luspatercept discontinuation. Nine patients died on treatment (unrelated to study drug). In most patients, ruxolitinib dose and spleen size remained stable. In patients with myelofibrosis, luspatercept improved anemia and transfusion burden across cohorts; the safety profile was consistent with previous studies. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03194542., (© 2024 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

The main objectives of multidisciplinary clinical investigation center (CIC-P) are to facilitate the availability of new drugs for patients, to enhance the visibility and attractiveness of French clinical research, to improve the quality of early phase trials, and to enhance the value of academic research by evaluating molecules in rare diseases. Since 2017, the CIC-P has been committed to a quality approach process, launching in 2018 its first satisfaction survey on patient care and clinical trial management of all its employees. A second satisfaction survey targeted by profession type was to be launched in 2020, in view of the requirements of the ISO 9001:2015 standard, but the process was interrupted following the coronavirus diseases 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The successful reorganization of the CIC-P activity during the first containment of the COVID-19 pandemic was driven by the implementation of a quality management system that promotes continuous improvement through the organization and involvement of all the staff. This voluntary and participative approach motivated the CIC-P to apply for the organizational sesame. The ISO 9001:2015 certification of CIC-P aims at increasing its performance, to satisfying its customers and to fully integrate its activities in a continuous improvement process, according to the requirements of this international standard, through the deployment of quality tools such as The Deming wheel (PDCA), an indispensable tool for transformation and reorganization; the analysis of the environment by the strengths, weakness, opportunities, threats (SWOT) analysis tool; the analysis and management of risks by the FMEA method, and all with performance indicators (SMART) and precise objectives at each stage of a project/process. The implementation of satisfaction questionnaires remains the essential tool for evaluating the expectations and needs of interested parties, but also for improving the quality of CIC-P activities and services. All these tools put in place have allowed us to continuously improve the means of production and to constantly improve our organization., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

The phase 3b FREEDOM trial (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03755518) evaluates efficacy/safety of fedratinib in intermediate- or high-risk myelofibrosis patients with platelet count ≥50 × 10 9 /L, previously treated with ruxolitinib. The trial design included protocol specified strategies to mitigate the risk for gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs), thiamine supplementation, and encephalopathy surveillance. Due to COVID-19, accrual was cut short with 38 patients enrolled. In the efficacy evaluable population ( n  = 35), nine (25.7%; 95% confidence interval 12.5-43.3) patients achieved primary endpoint of ≥35% spleen volume reduction (SVR) at end of cycle (EOC) 6; and 22 (62.9%) patients showed best overall response of ≥35% SVR up to end of treatment. Sixteen (44.4%) patients showed ≥50% reduction in total symptom score at EOC6 ( n  = 36). Compared to previously reported JAKARTA-2 trial, rates of GI AEs were lower, and no patient developed encephalopathy. Overall, FREEDOM study showed clinically relevant spleen and symptom responses with fedratinib, and effective mitigation of GI AEs.

Objectives: COVID-19 vaccine breakthrough infections were frequently reported during circulation of the Omicron variant. The ANRS|MIE CoviCompareP study investigated these infections in adults vaccinated and boosted with BNT162b2 [Pfizer-BioNTech] and with/without SARS-CoV-2 infection before vaccination., Methods: In the first half of 2021, healthy adults (aged 18-45, 65-74 and 75 or older) received either one dose of BNT162b2 (n = 120) if they had a documented history of SARS-CoV-2 infection at least five months previously, or two doses (n = 147) if they had no history confirmed by negative serological tests. A first booster dose was administered at least 6 months after the primary vaccination, and a second booster dose, if any, was reported in the database. Neutralizing antibodies (NAbs) against the European (D614G) strain and the Omicron BA.1 variant were assessed up to 28 days after the first booster dose. A case-control analysis was performed for the 252 participants who were followed up in 2022, during the Omicron waves., Results: From January to October 2022, 78/252 (31%) had a documented symptomatic breakthrough infection after full vaccination: 21/117 (18%) in those who had been infected before vaccination vs. 57/135 (42%) in those who had not. In a multivariate logistic regression model, factors associated with a lower risk of breakthrough infection were older age, a higher number of booster doses, and higher levels of Omicron BA.1 NAb titers in adults with infection before vaccination, but not in those without prior infection., Conclusion: Our results highlight the need to consider immune markers of protection in association with infection and vaccination history., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.. All rights reserved.)

Interferon-based therapies, such as ropeginterferon alfa-2b have emerged as promising disease-modifying agents for myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs), including essential thrombocythemia (ET). Current ET treatments aim to normalize hematological parameters and reduce the thrombotic risk, but they do not modify the natural history of the disease and hence, have no impact on disease progression. Ropeginterferon alfa-2b (trade name BESREMi®), a novel, monopegylated interferon alfa-2b with an extended administration interval, has demonstrated a robust and sustained efficacy in polycythemia vera (PV) patients. Given the similarities in disease pathophysiology and treatment goals, ropeginterferon alfa-2b holds promise as a treatment option for ET. The ROP-ET trial is a prospective, multicenter, single-arm phase III study that includes patients with ET who are intolerant or resistant to, and/or are ineligible for current therapies, such as hydroxyurea (HU), anagrelide (ANA), busulfan (BUS) and pipobroman, leaving these patients with limited treatment options. The primary endpoint is a composite response of hematologic parameters and disease-related symptoms, according to modified European LeukemiaNet (ELN) criteria. Secondary endpoints include improvements in symptoms and quality of life, molecular response and the safety profile of ropeginterferon alfa-2b. Over a 3-year period the trial assesses longer term outcomes, particularly the effects on allele burden and clinical outcomes, such as disease-related symptoms, vascular events and disease progression. No prospective clinical trial data exist for ropeginterferon alfa-2b in the planned ET study population and this study will provide new findings that may contribute to advancing the treatment landscape for ET patients with limited alternatives. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU Clinical Trials Register; EudraCT, 2023-505160-12-00; Registered on October 30, 2023., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) are characterized by a clonal proliferation of myeloid lineage cells within the bone marrow. The classical BCR-ABL negative MPNs are comprised of polycythaemia vera, essential thrombocythaemia and primary myelofibrosis. Historically, the majority of MPNs are diagnosed in adults older than 60 years of age; however, in recent years, there has been recognition of MPNs in the adolescent and young adult (AYA) population. AYAs with MPN, typically defined as between the ages of 15 and 39 years old, may comprise up to 20% of patients diagnosed with MPN. They demonstrate unique patterns of driver mutations and thrombotic events and remain at risk for progression to more aggressive disease states. Given the likely long length of time they will live with their disease, there is a significant unmet need in identifying well-tolerated and effective treatment options for these patients, particularly with the advent of disease modification. In this review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the clinical features, disease course and management of AYA patients with MPN and, in doing so, highlight key characteristics that distinguish them from their older counterparts., (© 2024 British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The current standard-of-care for treatment of myelofibrosis (MF) comprises inhibitors of the Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducers and activators (STAT) pathway; however, despite their ability to alleviate symptoms, they do not appear to modify underlying disease and have not demonstrated substantial survival benefit. Allogeneic-hematopoietic stem cell transplantation remains the only curative option for patients with MF but is limited to a subset of high-risk and fit patients. Early disease modification could positively affect disease trajectory for lower risk patients with MF as well as those with conditions that can precede MF, such as polycythemia vera and essential thrombocythemia. Here, the authors discuss critical unmet needs in the MF treatment paradigm, including: the need for safe, impactful therapies for lower risk patients, thus allowing intervention when success is most likely; better development of first-line therapies (likely highly novel or combination strategies) for intermediate-risk/higher risk patients; and approved drugs to manage cytopenia. Finally, a consensus definition of disease modification is needed that informs trial design, allowing the development of clinical end points that enable understanding of therapies and responses and that facilitate the development of therapies that work according to this definition. Through close collaboration between clinicians, patients, and the pharmaceutical industry, better efforts to define benefit and identify patients most likely to benefit from a particular combination or treatment strategy should enable the development of more effective and safe treatments to extend and improve quality of life for patients with MF., (© 2024 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

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., Competing Interests: Author Disclosures Author disclosure forms can be accessed in the Supplemental Material section., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Importance: There is still considerable controversy in the literature regarding the capacity of intramuscular messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccination to induce a mucosal immune response., Objective: To compare serum and salivary IgG and IgA levels among mRNA-vaccinated individuals with or without previous SARS-CoV-2 infection., Design, Setting, and Participants: In this cohort study, SARS-CoV-2-naive participants and those with previous infection were consecutively included in the CoviCompare P and CoviCompare M mRNA vaccination trials and followed up to day 180 after vaccination with either the BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) vaccine or the mRNA-1273 (Moderna) vaccine at the beginning of the COVID-19 vaccination campaign (from February 19 to June 8, 2021) in France. Data were analyzed from October 25, 2022, to July 13, 2023., Main Outcomes and Measures: An ultrasensitive digital enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay was used for the comparison of SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific serum and salivary IgG and IgA levels. Spike-specific secretory IgA level was also quantified at selected times., Results: A total of 427 individuals were included in 3 groups: participants with SARS-CoV-2 prior to vaccination who received 1 single dose of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) (n = 120) and SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals who received 2 doses of mRNA-1273 (Moderna) (n = 172) or 2 doses of BNT162b2 (Pfizer-BioNTech) (n = 135). The median age was 68 (IQR, 39-75) years, and 228 (53.4%) were men. SARS-CoV-2 spike-specific IgG saliva levels increased after 1 or 2 vaccine injections in individuals with previous infection and SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals. After vaccination, SARS-CoV-2-specific saliva IgA levels, normalized with respect to total IgA levels, were significantly higher in participants with previous infection, as compared with the most responsive mRNA-1273 (Moderna) recipients (median normalized levels, 155 × 10-5 vs 37 × 10-5 at day 29; 107 × 10-5 vs 54 × 10-5 at day 57; and 104 × 10-5 vs 70 × 10-5 at day 180 [P < .001]). In contrast, compared with day 1, spike-specific IgA levels in the BNT162b2-vaccinated SARS-CoV-2-naive group increased only at day 57 (36 × 10-5 vs 49 × 10-5 [P = .01]). Bona fide multimeric secretory IgA levels were significantly higher in individuals with previous infection compared with SARS-CoV-2-naive individuals after 2 antigenic stimulations (median optical density, 0.36 [IQR, 0.16-0.63] vs 0.16 [IQR, 0.10-0.22]; P < .001)., Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that mRNA vaccination was associated with mucosal immunity in individuals without prior SARS-CoV-2 infection, but at much lower levels than in previously infected individuals. Further studies are needed to determine the association between specific saliva IgA levels and prevention of infection or transmission.

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., Competing Interests: Stephen T. Oh reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Pharmaceuticals, CTI BioPharma, Disc Medicine, Incyte, Kartos Therapeutics, PharmaEssentia, and Sierra Oncology. Srdan Verstovsek reports consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Incyte, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology and research funding from AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, CTI BioPharma, Genentech, Gilead, Incyte, Italfarmaco, Novartis, NS Pharma, PharmaEssentia, and Promedior. Vikas Gupta reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Biopharma, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sierra Oncology; honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Biopharma, and Novartis; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Pfizer, and Roche. Uwe Platzbecker reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, and Novartis; honoraria from Amgen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisor board for AbbVie and Novartis. Timothy Devos reports consulting fees from AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Incyte, and MorphoSys and honoraria from Novartis and Sobi. Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian reports honoraria from Novartis and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, AOP Orphan, Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, and Novartis. Donal P. McLornan reports grants or contracts from CPI and honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis. Andrew Perkins reports honoraria from AbbVie, Novartis, CTI BioPharma, Sierra Oncology, and Kartos Therapeutics. Maria Laura Fox reports consulting fees from AbbVie, GSK, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology; payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis; and travel support from AbbVie. Mary Frances McMullin reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology and honoraria from AbbVie, AOP, Incyte, Novartis, and Pfizer. Adam J. Mead reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Galecto, Gilead, Incyte, Karyopharm, Novartis, Pfizer, Sensyn, and Sierra Oncology; travel fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene; and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene. Jiri Mayer reports research support from Sierra Oncology. Tomasz Sacha reports honoraria from Angelini Pharma, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. Jun Kawashima reports employment at Sierra Oncology and stock or stock options at Gilead Sciences and Sierra Oncology. Mei Huang reports employment and stock options at Sierra Oncology. Bryan Strouse reports employment at Sierra Oncology. Ruben Mesa reports grants or contracts from AbbVie, Celgene, CTI Biopharma, Constellation Biopharma, Genotech, Incyte, Promedior, Samus Therapeutics, and the Mays Cancer Center P30 Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute (CA054174) and consulting fees from Constellation Biopharma, La Jolla, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology. Miklos Egyed declares no conflict of interest., (© 2024 The Authors. eJHaem published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Current recommended risk scores to predict thrombotic events associated with myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPN) do not discriminate between arterial and venous thrombosis despite their different physiopathology. To define novel stratification systems, we delineated a comprehensive landscape of MPN associated thrombosis across a large long-term follow-up MPN cohort. Prior arterial thrombosis, age >60 years, cardiovascular risk factors and presence of TET2 or DNMT3A mutations were independently associated with arterial thrombosis in multivariable analysis. ARTS, an ARterial Thrombosis Score, based on these four factors, defined low- (0.37% patients-year) and high-risk (1.19% patients-year) patients. ARTS performance was superior to the two-tiered conventional risk stratification in our training cohort, across all MPN subtypes, as well as in two external validation cohorts. Prior venous thrombosis and presence of a JAK2 V617F mutation with a variant allelic frequency ≥50% were independently associated with venous thrombosis. The discrimination potential of VETS, a VEnous Thrombosis Score based on these two factors, was poor, similar to the two-tiered conventional risk stratification. Our study pinpoints arterial and venous thrombosis clinico-molecular differences and proposes an arterial risk score for more accurate patients' stratification. Further improvement of venous risk scores, accounting for additional factors and considering venous thrombosis as a heterogeneous entity is warranted., (© 2023. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature Limited.)

Classical myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) are characterized by the proliferation of myeloid cells and the risk of transformation into myelofibrosis or acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and TP53 mutations in MPN patients are linked to AML. However, JAK2V617F has been reported to impact the TP53 response to DNA damage, suggesting potential overlapping role of TP53 inactivation in MPN. We established a mouse model showing that JAK2V617F/Vav-Cre/Trp53 -/- mice displayed a similar phenotype to JAK2V617F/Vav-Cre mice, but their proliferation was outcompeted in competitive grafts. RNA-Seq revealed that half of the genes affected by JAK2V617F were affected by p53-inactivation, including the interferon pathway. To validate this finding, mice were repopulated with a mixture of wild-type and JAK2V617F (or JAK2V617F/Vav-Cre/Trp53 -/- ) cells and treated with pegylated interferonα. JAK2V617F-reconstituted mice entered complete hematological remission, while JAK2V617F/Vav-Cre /Trp53 -/- -reconstituted mice did not, confirming that p53 loss induced interferon-α resistance. KEGG and Gene Ontology analyses of common deregulated genes showed that these genes were mainly implicated in cytokine response, proliferation, and leukemia evolution, illustrating that in this mouse model, the development of MPN is not affected by TP53 inactivation. Taken together, our results show that many genetic modifications induced by JAK2V617F are influenced by TP53, the MPN phenotype may not be. Trp53 loss alone is insufficient to induce rapid leukemic transformation in steady-state hematopoiesis in JAK2V617F MPN, and Trp53 loss may contribute to interferon resistance in MPN., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Background: We investigated naporafenib (LXH254), a pan-RAF kinase inhibitor, with or without spartalizumab, in patients with advanced solid tumors harboring MAPK pathway alterations., Methods: This first-in-human phase 1 study had two dose-escalation arms: single-agent naporafenib (starting at 100 mg once-daily [QD]) and naporafenib (starting at the recommended dose/regimen)/spartalizumab (400 mg every 4 weeks). The naporafenib/spartalizumab dose-expansion part enrolled patients with KRAS-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and NRAS-mutated melanoma. The primary objectives were to establish the maximum tolerated doses (MTD)/recommended doses for expansion (RDE) and evaluate tolerability and safety., Results: A total of 142 patients were included in the naporafenib dose-escalation (n = 87), naporafenib/spartalizumab dose-escalation (n = 12) and naporafenib/spartalizumab dose-expansion (n = 43) arms. The MTD/RDE of naporafenib was 600 mg twice-daily (BID). In naporafenib escalation, five patients experienced 7 dose-limiting toxicities: decreased platelet count (1200 mg QD); neuralgia, maculopapular rash, pruritus (600 mg BID); increased blood bilirubin, hyponatremia, peripheral sensory neuropathy (800 mg BID). No DLTs occurred in the naporafenib/spartalizumab arm: the RDE was established at 400 mg BID. The most common treatment-related adverse events were rash and dermatitis acneiform (each 24.1%; naporafenib), nausea and pruritus (each 33.3%; naporafenib/spartalizumab; escalation) and rash (39.5%; naporafenib/spartalizumab; expansion). Naporafenib reduced DUSP6 expression in tumors. Two partial responses (PRs) occurred in naporafenib escalation, and 1 complete response and 3 PRs in the naporafenib/spartalizumab NRAS-mutated melanoma and KRAS-mutated NSCLC arms, respectively., Conclusions: Naporafenib, with or without spartalizumab, showed an acceptable safety profile, pharmacodynamic activity and limited antitumor activity. Additional naporafenib combination therapies are currently under investigation., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Filip Janku received research support from Astex, Novartis, BioMed Valley Discoveries, Fore Bio, Deciphera, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Asana, Ideaya Biosciences, Sanofi, Merck, F-star, JSI Innopharm, Bioxcel, Lilly, Bicara, PureTech Health, FujiFilm Pharmaceuticals, Piqur, Sotio, Synlogic, NextCure and Hutchinson Medipharma; served on the Scientific Advisory Boards of Ideaya Biosciences, Synlogic, Sotio, Puretech Health, Deciphera, Crown Bioscience, Asana, Fore Bio, Novartis, Bicara and PegaOne; served as a paid consultant for Mersana Therapeutics, Flame Bio, Cardiff Oncology, MedinCell and Immunomet; has ownership interests in Cardiff Oncology and Monte Rosa Therapeutics; and has the leadership position in Monte Rosa Therapeutics. Tae Min Kim received consulting fees or honoraria for lectures from AstraZeneca, IMBDx, Inc., Janssen, Regeneron, Samsung Bioepis, Takeda and Yuhan; had advisory role for AstraZeneca, Janssen, Regeneron and Takeda; and received a research grant from AstraZeneca-KHIDI outside this work. Gopakumar Iyer reports consulting or advisory role for Bayer, Janssen, Mirati Therapeutics, Basilea Pharmaceutica, Flare Therapeutics and Aadi Bioscience; speakers' bureau for Gilead Sciences and Lynx Group; and research funding (to institution) from Mirati Therapeutics, Novartis, Janssen, Seattle Genetics, LOXO at Lilly and Aadi Bioscience. Anna Spreafico has received consulting fees from Merck, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Oncorus, Janssen, and Medison & Immunocore; and funding support for clinical trials paid to the Institution from Novartis, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Symphogen, AstraZeneca/Medimmune, Merck, Bayer, Surface Oncology, Northern Biologics, Janssen Oncology/Johnson & Johnson, Roche, Regeneron, Alkermes, Array Biopharma/Pfizer, GSK, NuBiyota, Oncorus, Treadwell and Amgen. Elena Elez has received personal speaker honoraria from Organon and Novartis; and personal advisory board honoraria from Amgen, Bayer, Hoffman-La Roche, Merck Serono, Sanofi, Pierre Fabre, MSD and Servier. Noboru Yamamoto reports research grants from Astellas, Chugai, Eisai, Taiho, BMS, Pfizer, Novartis, Eli Lilly, AbbVie, Daiichi-Sankyo, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Kyowa Kirin, Takeda, ONO, Janssen Pharma, MSD, Merck, GSK, Sumitomo Pharma, Chiome Bioscience, Otsuka, Carna Biosciences, Genmab, Shionogi, TORAY, KAKEN, AstraZeneca, Cmic, InventisBio and Rakuten Medical; advisory roles for Eisai, Takeda, Boehringer Ingelheim, Cmic, Chugai, Merck and Healios; and honoraria as a Speaker from ONO, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo and Eisai. Anthonie J. van der Wekken reports grants and other support from AstraZeneca, Pfizer, Roche and Takeda; grants from Boehringer Ingelheim; and other support from Agena and Janssen, outside the submitted work. All payments were made to the University Medical Centre Groningen. Paolo Antonio Ascierto has/had a consultant/advisory role for Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche-Genentech, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis, Merck Serono, Pierre-Fabre, AstraZeneca, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Sandoz, Immunocore, Italfarmaco, Nektar, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eisai, Regeneron, Daiichi Sankyo, Pfizer, Oncosec, Nouscom, Lunaphore, Seagen, iTeos, Medicenna, Bio-Al Health, ValoTX, Replimmune, Bayer and Erasca; received research funding from Bristol Myers Squibb, Roche-Genentech, Pfizer and Sanofi; and travel support from Pfizer, Bio-Al Health and Replimmune. Frederik Marmé reports personal fees from GSK, Roche, Novartis, AstraZeneca, MSD, Vaccibody, Gilead Sciences, Eisai, Pfizer, Myriad, Genomic Health, Seagen, Daiichi Sankyo, Pierre Fabre, Agendia, Lilly and Clovis outside the submitted work. Jean-Jacques Kiladjian reports consulting fees from GSK and Abbvie; payment or honoraria for lectures, presentations, speakers’ bureaus, manuscript writing or educational events from Novartis and AOP Health; participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Incyte and BMS. Sumit Basu, Fabienne Baffert, Amparo Buigues, Vesselina Cooke and Jaeyeon Kim are employees and stockholders of Novartis. Chi Chen and Elisa Giorgetti are employees of Novartis. Fiona McCarthy is a previous employee and a stockholder of Novartis. Michele Moschetta is a previous employee and a stockholder of Novartis and has submitted a patent application related to LXH254. Reinhard Dummer reports intermittent, project-focused consulting and/or advisory relationships with Novartis, Merck Sharp & Dhome (MSD), Bristol-Myers Squibb (BMS), Roche, Amgen, Takeda, Pierre Fabre, Sun Pharma, Sanofi, Catalym, Second Genome, Regeneron, Alligator, T3 Pharma, MaxiVAX SA, Pfizer and touchIME outside the submitted work. Maja de Jonge and Michela Maur report no conflicts of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Standard therapy for myelofibrosis comprises Janus kinase inhibitors (JAKis), yet spleen response rates of 30%-40%, high discontinuation rates, and a lack of disease modification highlight an unmet need. Pelabresib (CPI-0610) is an investigational, selective oral bromodomain and extraterminal domain inhibitor (BETi)., Methods: MANIFEST (ClinicalTrails.gov identifier: NCT02158858), a global, open-label, nonrandomized, multicohort, phase II study, includes a cohort of JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis treated with pelabresib and ruxolitinib. The primary end point is a spleen volume reduction of ≥ 35% (SVR35) at 24 weeks., Results: Eighty-four patients received ≥ 1 dose of pelabresib and ruxolitinib. The median age was 68 (range, 37-85) years; 24% of patients were intermediate-1 risk, 61% were intermediate-2 risk, and 16% were high risk as per the Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System; 66% (55 of 84) of patients had a hemoglobin level of < 10 g/dL at baseline. At 24 weeks, 68% (57 of 84) achieved SVR35, and 56% (46 of 82) achieved a total symptom score reduction of ≥ 50% (TSS50). Additional benefits at week 24 included 36% (29 of 84) of patients with improved hemoglobin levels (mean, 1.3 g/dL; median, 0.8 g/dL), 28% (16 of 57) with ≥ 1 grade improvement in fibrosis, and 29.5% (13 of 44) with > 25% reduction in JAK2 V617F-mutant allele fraction, which was associated with SVR35 response ( P = .018, Fisher's exact test). At 48 weeks, 60% (47 of 79) of patients had SVR35 response. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities seen in ≥ 10% patients were thrombocytopenia (12%) and anemia (35%), leading to treatment discontinuation in three patients. 95% (80 of 84) of the study participants continued combination therapy beyond 24 weeks., Conclusion: The rational combination of the BETi pelabresib and ruxolitinib in JAKi-naïve patients with myelofibrosis was well tolerated and showed durable improvements in spleen and symptom burden, with associated biomarker findings of potential disease-modifying activity.

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 × 10 9 /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., Competing Interests: J-JK reports honoraria from Novartis, and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, AOP Orphan, Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, and Novartis. AMV reports honoraria from AbbVie, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Incyte, and Novartis, and participation on a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Incyte, MorphoSys, Novartis, and Roche. ATG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Constellation/MorphoSys, CTI Biopharma, Novartis, PharmaEssentia, and Sierra Oncology. VG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Biopharma, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sierra Oncology; honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Biopharma, and Novartis; and participation on data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Pfizer, and Roche. SV reports consulting fees from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Incyte, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology, and research funding from AstraZeneca, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, CTI BioPharma, Genentech, Gilead, Incyte, Italfarmaco, Novartis, NS Pharma, PharmaEssentia, and Promedior. UP reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Janssen, and Novartis; honoraria from Amgen, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, and Takeda; and participation on data safety monitoring board or advisor board for AbbVie and Novartis. JM reports research support from Sierra Oncology. AI reports consulting fees from Celgene, Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, and Takeda; and meeting/travel support from Janssen, Novartis, Pfizer, and Roche. TW reports meeting/travel support from Novartis and Roche. STO reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Blueprint Medicines, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Pharmaceuticals, CTI Biopharma, Disc Medicine, Incyte, Kartos Therapeutics, PharmaEssentia, and Sierra Oncology. DML reports grant support from CPI; speaker fees from AbbVie, Celgene, Jazz, and Novartis. S-SY reports grant support from Roche-Genentech and Yuhan Pharmaceuticals; consulting fees from Amgen and Novartis; honoraria for lectures from Novartis; and participation in data safety monitoring board or advisory board for Hanmi and Pharos iBio. CH reports grant support from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Pharmaceuticals, and Novartis; consulting fees from AOP, Galecto, Keros, and Roche; honoraria from AbbVie, Celgene, Constellation Pharmaceuticals, CTI Biopharma, Janssen, and Novartis; participation in data safety monitoring board or advisory board for AbbVie, AOP, CTI Biopharma, Geron, Promedior, Roche, and Sierra Oncology; and leadership or fiduciary role in the European Hematology Association and MPN Voice. BK, MH, and JK report employment and stock or stock options at Sierra Oncology, a GSK company. RM reports grants or contracts from AbbVie, Celgene, CTI Biopharma, Constellation Biopharma, Genotech, Incyte, Promedior, Samus Therapeutics, and the Mays Cancer Center P30 Cancer Center Support Grant from the National Cancer Institute (CA054174), and consulting fees from Constellation Biopharma, LaJolla, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology. All the other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the European Hematology Association.)

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., Competing Interests: RAM has consulted and received honoraria from Novartis, Sierra Oncology, Gentech, Blueprint, Geron, Telios, CTI, Incyte, BMS, AbbVie, GSK and Morphosys. CH has consulted for Galecto DISC and Keros and received compensation; received honoraria from Novartis, CTI, BMS, Sierra, and GSK; participated on an Ad Board for AOP, Telios, Sumitomo, and Keros; and had a leadership role in EHA, HemaSphere, and MPN Voice. VG has consulted for Novartis, BMS Celgene, Sierra Oncology, AbbVie, Constellation Biopharma, Pfizer, GSK Pharma, and CTI Biopharma and received compensation; received honoraria from Novartis and BMS Celgene; and received compensation for participation on an Ad Board for BMS Celgene, Roche, AbbVie, Pfizer, Sierra Oncology, and CTI Biopharma. DPM received a research grant from Imago Biosciences; received honoraria from JAZZ Pharma, AbbVie, and Novartis; participated in the UK ALL RIC TRIAL – DSM board and is an EBMT Scientific Council Member Chair of the EBMT CMWP. MFM received honoraria from Novartis, Abbvie, and AOP; and received compensation for participation on an Ad Board from Novartis, BMS, AbbVie, CTI, Sierra Oncology, and GSK. J-JK received compensation and participated in Ad Boards for Novartis, AbbVie, BMS, GSK, Incyte, and AOP Health. LF received honoraria from Novartis and BMS and participated in Ad Boards for Incyte and GS. MLF has consulted for Novartis, GSK, AbbVie, and Sierra Oncology and received compensation; and received honoraria from Novartis and BMS and attended meetings for AbbVie. DMR has consulted for Keros, and the institution received compensation; received honoraria from Novartis personally and to the institution; received compensation from Novartis to attend a meeting; received compensation to the institution for participation on an Ad Board from Novartis, Menarini, and Takeda. STO has consulted for AbbVie, Constellation, CTI BioPharma, BMS, Geron, Sierra Oncology, Cogent, Protagonist, and Incyte and received compensation. JK owned stock in Sierra Oncology and owns stock in Gilead. SR and RD owned stock in Sierra Oncology. SD is an employee at Sierra Oncology. BG received compensation from GSK for attending meetings and owns stock in GSK. SV received compensation for participation on an Ad Board. UP received honoraria and research support from Geron, GSK, Novartis, Abbvie, and Curis. JMP received honoraria to the institution from CTI; and received compensation to the institution for participation in an Ad Board for Morphosys. AJM received support from Abbvie for the present article; received grants or contracts from Celgene/BMS; received royalties or licenses from Alethiomics; received consulting fees from Celgene/BMS paid to the Sierra Oncology, Novartis paid to Karyopharm, Abbvie paid to Sensyn, and CTI paid to Incyte, Galecto, Pfizer, and Gilead; received honoraria from Celgene/BMS, Novartis, and Abbvie; received support to attend meetings from Celgene/BMS and Novartis; and participated on an Ad Board for Celgene/BMS and Abbvie. All authors received medical writing support for this article funded by Sierra Oncology, a GSK company. All the other authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (Copyright © 2023 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. on behalf of the European Hematology Association.)

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., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

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., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Background: The MOMENTUM study met all key endpoints at week 24, demonstrating symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits with momelotinib versus danazol in patients with myelofibrosis. In this updated analysis, we report duration of week 24 responses and new responses with momelotinib through week 48., Methods: MOMENTUM is an international, double-blind, randomised, phase 3 study done at 107 sites across 21 countries. Patients were 18 years or older with primary, post-polycythaemia vera, or post-essential thrombocythaemia myelofibrosis, previously treated with an approved Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor for 90 days or more (≥28 days with haematological complications), and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2 or less. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to either the momelotinib group (200 mg orally once per day) or danazol group (300 mg orally twice per day) through week 24 via non-deterministic biased coin minimisation and an interactive response system. Stratification factors were Total Symptom Score (TSS; <22 vs ≥22), spleen size (<12 cm vs ≥12 cm), transfusion burden (0 units vs 1-4 units vs ≥5 units), and study site. After week 24, all patients initially randomly assigned to either group who remained on the study received open-label momelotinib. The primary endpoint, which has already been reported, was Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form TSS response rate at week 24. Predefined secondary endpoints were duration of week 24 TSS and transfusion independence responses, safety, and survival, which are summarised post hoc at the week 48 data cutoff (May 17, 2022). TSS, transfusion independence, and splenic responses at week 48 were defined post hoc and assessed in all evaluable patients who entered the open-label period and provided sufficient data. The timing of this updated analysis was defined post hoc after all patients had the opportunity to complete their week 48 assessments, as most patients entered an extended access study (NCT03441113) after week 48. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT04173494, and is now complete., Findings: Between April 24, 2020, and Dec 3, 2021, a total of 195 patients were randomised (130 [67%] in the momelotinib group and 65 [33%] in the danazol group). 93 (72%) of 130 patients in the momelotinib group and 41 (63%) of 65 in the danazol group entered the momelotinib open-label extension period. Median follow-up was 48·4 weeks (IQR 40·6-55·7). Among TSS-evaluable patients at week 48, 30 (45%) of 67 patients in the momelotinib group who continued treatment and 15 (50%) of 30 in the danazol group who crossed over were responders. TSS responders at any time during the open-label period by week 48 were 46 (61%) of 75 evaluable patients in the momelotinib group who continued and 19 (59%) of 32 in the danazol group who crossed over, including most week 24 responders plus new responders after week 24. No new safety signals emerged with long-term follow-up. The most common non-haematological treatment-emergent adverse events in momelotinib-treated patients over the entire study period as of the data cutoff were diarrhoea (45 [26%] of 171) and asthenia (28 [16%]); the most common grades 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (33 [19%]) and anaemia (19 [11%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 79 (46%) of 171 patients, and fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 30 (18%); two fatal treatment-emergent adverse events were considered possibly related to momelotinib (rotaviral enteritis and Staphylococcus pneumonia)., Interpretation: Momelotinib was associated with durable symptom, spleen, and anaemia benefits, late responses after week 24, and favourable safety through week 48. These results highlight the potential benefits of treatment with momelotinib in patients with myelofibrosis, particularly those with anaemia., Funding: Sierra Oncology, a GSK company., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests ATG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Constellation/MorphoSys, CTI Biopharma, Imago Biosciences/Merck, Incyte, Pharma Essentia, Sierra Oncology/GSK, and Telios. SV reports consulting fees from GSK. AMV reports payment or honoraria from AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Incyte, Novartis, and Roche. HKA-A reports research grants from Bristol Myers Squibb and Incyte; honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, and Novartis; and advisory board participation with AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, and Novartis. DL reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Medisson, and Takeda; payment or honoraria from AbbVie, Novartis, Roche, and Takeda; travel support from AbbVie; and advisory board participation with AbbVie and Medisson. ATK reports consulting fees from CTI Biopharma, GSK, and Imago Biosciences; payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, Incyte, and MorphoSys; travel support from AbbVie and MorphoSys; and advisory board participation with Incyte. AI reports payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Incyte, Novartis, and Pfizer; and advisory board participation with AOP Health, Incyte, and Novartis. YTG reports consulting fees from AstraZeneca, GSK, Novartis, and Pfizer; and payment or honoraria from AbbVie. MLF reports consulting fees from AbbVie, GSK, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology; payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis; and travel support from AbbVie. DM reports a research grant from Imago Biosciences; payment or honoraria from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Jazz Pharma, and Novartis; participation on a data safety monitoring board for the UK ALL-RIC trial; and a leadership or fiduciary role as a member of the EBMT Scientific Council and chair of the EBMT Chronic Malignancies Working Party. S-SY reports grants or contracts from Roche-Genentech, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, and Yuhan Pharma; payment or honoraria from Celgene, Janssen, and Novartis; and advisory board participation with Amgen, Antengene, and Takeda. VG reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Constellation Biopharma, CTI Biopharma, GSK, Novartis, Pfizer, and Sierra Oncology; payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene and Novartis; and advisory board participation with AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, CTI Biopharma, Pfizer, Roche, and Sierra Oncology. J-JK reports advisory board participation with AbbVie, AOP Health, Bristol Myers Squibb, GSK, Incyte, and Novartis. FP reports grants or contracts from Bristol Myers Squibb; consulting fees from AbbVie, AOP Orphan, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Kartos, Karyopharm, Kyowa Kirin and MEI, Novartis, Roche, Sierra Oncology, and Sumimoto; and payment or honoraria from AbbVie, AOP Orphan, Bristol Myers Squibb/Celgene, Novartis, and Roche. CNH reports payment for study conduct and advisory board participation, related to the present manuscript; consulting fees from DISC, Galecto, and Keros; payment or honoraria from Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI Biopharma, GSK, Novartis, and Sierra Oncology; advisory board participation with AOP, Keros, Sumimoto, and Telios; and a leadership or fiduciary role with EHA, HemaSphere, and MPN Voice. SO reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Bristol Myers Squibb, Cogent, Constellation, CTI Biopharma, Geron, Incyte, Protagonist, and Sierra Oncology. BJK and RD employment and stock/stock options with Sierra Oncology, a GSK company. JY reports employment and stock or stock options with GSK. JK reports employment and stock or stock options with Sierra Oncology, a GSK company; and stock or stock options with Gilead. RM reports consulting fees from AbbVie, Blueprint, Bristol Myers Squibb, CTI, Genentech, Geron, GSK, Incyte, MorphoSys, Novartis, Sierra Oncology, and Telios. All authors received medical writing support related to the present manuscript, funded by GSK. SG, MCL, ME, NG, AP, S-EL, and LO declare no other competing interests., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: Investigation of the disparities in the access to experimental treatment in early-phase clinical trials is lacking. The objective of the EGALICAN-2 study was to identify the factors underpinning such inequalities., Methods: A national prospective survey was conducted in 11 early-phase clinical trial centers (CLIP 2 ) certified by the French National Cancer Institute. Sociodemographic, socioeconomic and medical data were collected. Univariate logistic regression models were carried out to estimate odds ratios and 90% confidence intervals associated with the effect of each study variable. A multivariate logistic regression model was built to explore the independent factors associated with the administration of the experimental treatment (C1D1). A post hoc analysis was carried out excluding female cancer patients., Results: Between 2015 and 2016, 1355 patients referred from 11 CLIP 2 centers in France were included in the study. Eight hundred and forty-eight patients received C1D1 (73%) and 320 patients (27%) were screening failure. Median age was 58 years (range 17-97 years) and 667 patients (54%) were female. Most patients had a metastatic disease (n = 751, 87%). In the multivariate logistic regression analysis, the significant independent factors associated with C1D1 were male sex, initial care received in a hospital with an early-phase unit and living in wealthy metropolitan areas (P values <0.05). In the post hoc analysis, the sex factor was no longer significant [odds ratio = 1.21 (95% confidence interval 0.86-1.70), P value = 0.271]., Conclusions: This study investigated the factors producing social inequalities in the context of early-phase clinical trials in oncology. Our research highlights factors of sex, care pathway and geographic location. Gynecological cancer was found to impact C1D1 significantly, unlike breast cancer. The results of this study should contribute to improve patient access to early-phase clinical trials., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Momelotinib is the first inhibitor of Janus kinase 1 (JAK1) and JAK2 shown to also inhibit activin A receptor type 1 (ACVR1), a key regulator of iron homeostasis, and has demonstrated improvements in splenomegaly, constitutional symptoms, and anemia in myelofibrosis (MF). This long-term analysis pooled data from 3 randomized phase 3 studies of momelotinib (MOMENTUM, SIMPLIFY-1, and SIMPLIFY-2), representing MF disease from early (JAK inhibitor-naive) to late (JAK inhibitor-experienced) stages. Patients in the control arms (danazol in MOMENTUM, ruxolitinib in SIMPLIFY-1, and best available therapy in SIMPLIFY-2) could cross over to receive momelotinib at the end of the 24-week randomized period, and all patients could continue momelotinib treatment after the completion of these studies via an extended access protocol (XAP). Across these studies, 725 patients with MF received momelotinib; 12% remained on therapy for ≥5 years, with a median treatment exposure of 11.3 months (range, 0.1-90.4 months). The most common nonhematologic treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) occurring in ≥20% of patients was diarrhea (any grade, 27% and grade ≥3, 3%). Any-grade thrombocytopenia, anemia, and neutropenia occurred in 25%, 23%, and 7% of patients, respectively. The most common reason for momelotinib discontinuation was thrombocytopenia (4% discontinuation rate). The incidence of AEs of clinical importance (eg, infections, malignant transformation, peripheral neuropathy, and hemorrhage) did not increase over time. This analysis of one of the largest randomized trial databases for a JAK inhibitor to date in MF demonstrated a consistent safety profile of momelotinib without long-term or cumulative toxicity. These trials were registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as: MOMENTUM (#NCT04173494), SIMPLIFY-1 (#NCT01969838), SIMPLIFY-2 (#NCT02101268), and XAP (#NCT03441113)., (© 2023 by The American Society of Hematology. Licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), permitting only noncommercial, nonderivative use with attribution. All other rights reserved.)

Myelofibrosis (MF) is a clonal malignancy frequently characterized by anemia and in 10%-20% of cases it can evolve into blast phase (BP). Anemia in MF is associated with reduced survival and -in primary MF- also with an increased probability of BP. Conventional treatments for anemia have limited effectiveness in MF. Within a dataset of 1752 MF subjects largely unexposed to ruxolitinib (RUX), BP incidence was 2.5% patients per year (p-y). This rate reached respectively 4.3% and 4.5% p-y in case of patients with common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) grade 3/4 and grade 2 anemia, respectively, that represented together 32% of the cohort. Among 273 MF cases treated with RUX, BP incidence was 2.89% p-y and it reached 4.86% p-y in subjects who started RUX with CTCAE grade 2 anemia (one third of total). Within patients with red blood cell transfusion-dependency at 6 months of RUX (21% of the exposed), BP rate was 4.2% p-y. Our study highlights a relevant incidence of BP in anemic MF patients, with a similar rate whether treated with or without RUX. These findings will help treating physicians to make decisions on the safety profile of innovative anemia treatments., Competing Interests: BM received honoraria for lecture from Novartis. FP received honoraria for lectures and advisory boards from Novartis, GSK, Bristol‐Myers Squibb/Celgene, Sierra Oncology, Abbvie, Janssen, Roche, AOP Orphan, Karyiopharma, Kyowa Kirin and MEI, Sumitomo. Other authors have no conflict of interest to disclose., (© 2023 The Authors. eJHaem published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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.

Primary myelofibrosis (PMF) and polycythaemia vera (PV) are rare BCR-ABL1 -negative myeloproliferative neoplasms, associated with an increased risk of thrombosis, haemorrhagic complications and progression to fibrosis or leukaemia or fibrosis for PV. Both diseases are characterised by biological and clinical heterogeneity, leading to great variability in their management in routine clinical practice. In this review, we present an updated overview of the diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of PMF and PV, and we discuss how our multidisciplinary expert group based across France translates this evidence-based knowledge into routine clinical practice., Competing Interests: Shanti Amé participated in advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis. Fiorenza Barraco declares no competing financial interests. Jean‐Christophe Ianotto received speaker fees from Novartis. Eric Jourdan participated in advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis and AbbVie. Jérôme Rey participated in advisory boards for Bristol Myers Squibb, Novartis and AbbVie. Jean‐François Viallard received speaker fees from AOP Orphan, Novartis, Bristol Myers Squibb, AbbVie and Gilead. Mathieu Wémeau participated in advisory boards for AbbVie, AOP Orphan, Bristol Myers Squibb and Novartis, and received speaker fees from Novartis. Jean‐Jacques Kiladjian received consulting fees from AbbVie and Novartis, speaker fees from AOP Orphan, Novartis and Bristol Myers Squibb, and participated in advisory boards for Incyte., (© 2023 The Authors. eJHaem published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: In a pooled analysis of the phase 3 Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral JAK Inhibitor Treatment I (COMFORT-I) and COMFORT-II clinical trials, adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis who received oral ruxolitinib at randomization or after crossover from placebo or best available therapy (BAT) had improved overall survival (OS)., Methods: This post hoc analysis of pooled COMFORT data examined relevant disease outcomes based on the disease duration (≤12 or >12 months from diagnosis) before ruxolitinib initiation., Results: The analysis included 525 patients (ruxolitinib: ≤12 months, n = 84; >12 months, n = 216; placebo/BAT: ≤12 months, n = 66; >12 months, n = 159); the median age was 65.0-70.0 years. Fewer thrombocytopenia and anemia events were observed among patients who initiated ruxolitinib treatment earlier. At Weeks 24 and 48, the spleen volume response (SVR) was higher for patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (47.6% vs. 32.9% at Week 24, p = .0610; 44.0% vs. 26.9% at Week 48, p = .0149). In a multivariable analysis of factors associated with spleen volume reduction, a logistic regression model that controlled for confounding factors found that a significantly greater binary reduction was observed among patients with shorter versus longer disease duration (p = .022). At Week 240, OS was significantly improved among patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (63% [95% CI, 51%-73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 49%-64%]; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01-2.31; p = .0430). Regardless of disease duration, a longer OS was observed for patients who received ruxolitinib versus those who received placebo/BAT., Conclusions: These findings suggest that earlier ruxolitinib initiation for adult patients with intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis may improve clinical outcomes, including fewer cytopenia events, durable SVR, and prolonged OS., Plain Language Summary: Patients with myelofibrosis, a bone marrow cancer, often do not live as long as the general population. These patients may also have an enlarged spleen and difficult symptoms such as fatigue. Two large clinical trials showed that patients treated with the drug ruxolitinib lived longer and had improved symptoms compared to those treated with placebo or other standard treatments. Here it was examined whether starting treatment with ruxolitinib earlier (i.e., within a year of diagnosis) provided benefits versus delaying treatment. Patients who received ruxolitinib within a year of diagnosis lived longer and experienced fewer disease symptoms than those whose treatment was delayed., (© 2023 The Authors. Cancer published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)