Long-term treatment with ruxolitinib for patients with myelofibrosis: 5-year update from the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 COMFORT-I trial

Srdan Verstovsek, Ruben A Mesa, Jason Gotlib, Vikas Gupta, John F DiPersio, John V Catalano, Michael W N Deininger, Carole B Miller, Richard T Silver, Moshe Talpaz, Elliott F Winton, Jimmie H Harvey Jr, Murat O Arcasoy, Elizabeth O Hexner, Roger M Lyons, Ronald Paquette, Azra Raza, Mark Jones, Deanna Kornacki, Kang Sun, Hagop Kantarjian, COMFORT-I investigators, Srdan Verstovsek, Ruben A Mesa, Jason Gotlib, Vikas Gupta, John F DiPersio, John V Catalano, Michael W N Deininger, Carole B Miller, Richard T Silver, Moshe Talpaz, Elliott F Winton, Jimmie H Harvey Jr, Murat O Arcasoy, Elizabeth O Hexner, Roger M Lyons, Ronald Paquette, Azra Raza, Mark Jones, Deanna Kornacki, Kang Sun, Hagop Kantarjian, COMFORT-I investigators

Abstract

Background: The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 COMFORT-I trial evaluated the JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib in patients with intermediate-2/high-risk myelofibrosis. The primary and planned 3-year analyses of COMFORT-I data demonstrated that ruxolitinib-the first myelofibrosis-approved therapy-reduced splenomegaly and prolonged overall survival versus placebo. Here, we present the final 5-year results.

Methods: Patients managed in Australia, Canada, and the USA were randomized centrally (interactive voice response system) 1:1 to oral ruxolitinib twice daily (15 or 20 mg per baseline platelet counts) or placebo. Investigators and patients were blinded to treatment. The secondary endpoints evaluated in this analysis were durability of a ≥35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume (spleen response) and overall survival, evaluated in the intent-to-treat population. Safety was evaluated in patients who received study treatment.

Results: Patients were randomized (September 2009-April 2010) to ruxolitinib (n = 155) or placebo (n = 154). At termination, 27.7% of ruxolitinib-randomized patients and 25.2% (28/111) who crossed over from placebo were on treatment; no patients remained on placebo. Patients randomized to ruxolitinib had a median spleen response duration of 168.3 weeks and prolonged median overall survival versus placebo (ruxolitinib group, not reached; placebo group, 200 weeks; HR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.50-0.96; P = 0.025) despite the crossover to ruxolitinib. The ruxolitinib safety profile remained consistent with previous analyses. The most common new-onset all-grade nonhematologic adverse events starting <12 versus ≥48 months after ruxolitinib initiation were fatigue (29.0 vs 33.3%) and diarrhea (27.8 vs 14.6%). New-onset grade 3 or 4 anemia and thrombocytopenia both primarily occurred within the first 6 months, with no cases after 42 months. The most common treatment-emergent adverse event-related deaths in the ruxolitinib-randomized group were sepsis (2.6%), disease progression (1.9%), and pneumonia (1.9%).

Conclusion: The final COMFORT-I results continue to support ruxolitinib as an effective treatment for patients with intermediate-2/high-risk MF.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00952289.

Keywords: JAK; Janus kinase; Myelofibrosis.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Patient disposition. *Three patients in the placebo group were not evaluable for safety (n = 151); these patients were excluded from the calculation of the percentage of patients who discontinued. (dagger) Limited to patients whose study discontinuation dates matched their dates of death. (double dagger) Including but not limited to the following: received a different therapy, transitioned to commercial ruxolitinib, and loss of response
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Duration of ≥35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume. Duration of spleen response was evaluated for the 92 patients in the ruxolitinib group who achieved a ≥35% reduction from baseline in spleen volume. NE, not evaluable
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Median percentage change from baseline in spleen volume over time. *For patients in the ruxolitinib crossover group, baseline represents the date of crossover to ruxolitinib. BL, baseline
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Overall survival. The overall survival analysis included all patients who died during the study or during long-term follow-up after discontinuation of study treatment. HR, hazard ratio
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Overall survival by IPSS risk status. In both treatment arms, overall survival was significantly longer for patients with int-2 compared with high-risk MF at diagnosis (ruxolitinib, P = 0.002; placebo, P = 0.004). Ruxolitinib was associated with nonsignificant survival advantages compared with placebo for both the int-2 and high-risk patient subgroups. HR, hazard ratio; int-2, intermediate-2; IPSS, International Prognostic Scoring System; MF, myelofibrosis
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Incidence of new or worsening grade 3 or 4 a anemia, b thrombocytopenia, and c leukopenia over time. Anemia, thrombocytopenia, and leukopenia were based on hematologic laboratory abnormalities. (asterisk) Placebo arm data are only shown up to 6 months because all patients randomized to placebo crossed over or discontinued within 3 months of the primary analysis
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Mean blood counts over time in the ruxolitinib randomized and ruxolitinib crossover groups. Blood counts were based on measurements of a hemoglobin level, b platelet counts, and c white blood cell counts. *For patients in the ruxolitinib crossover group, BL represents the date of crossover to ruxolitinib. BL, baseline

References

    1. Arber DA, Orazi A, Hasserjian R, Thiele J, Borowitz MJ, Le Beau MM, et al. The 2016 revision to the World Health Organization classification of myeloid neoplasms and acute leukemia. Blood. 2016;127:2391–405. doi: 10.1182/blood-2016-03-643544.
    1. Mesa R, Miller CB, Thyne M, Mangan J, Goldberger S, Fazal S, et al. Myeloproliferative neoplasms (MPNs) have a significant impact on patients’ overall health and productivity: the MPN Landmark survey. BMC Cancer. 2016;16:167. doi: 10.1186/s12885-016-2208-2.
    1. Pardanani A, Guglielmelli P, Lasho TL, Pancrazzi A, Finke CM, Vannucchi AM, et al. Primary myelofibrosis with or without mutant MPL: comparison of survival and clinical features involving 603 patients. Leukemia. 2011;25:1834–9. doi: 10.1038/leu.2011.161.
    1. Hultcrantz M, Kristinsson SY, Andersson TM, Landgren O, Eloranta S, Derolf AR, et al. Patterns of survival among patients with myeloproliferative neoplasms diagnosed in Sweden from 1973 to 2008: a population-based study. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:2995–3001. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.1925.
    1. Gupta V, Hari P, Hoffman R. Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation for myelofibrosis in the era of JAK inhibitors. Blood. 2012;120:1367–79. doi: 10.1182/blood-2012-05-399048.
    1. Tefferi A, Guglielmelli P, Larson DR, Finke C, Wassie EA, Pieri L, et al. Long-term survival and blast transformation in molecularly-annotated essential thrombocythemia, polycythemia vera and myelofibrosis. Blood. 2014;124:2507–13. doi: 10.1182/blood-2014-05-579136.
    1. Klampfl T, Gisslinger H, Harutyunyan AS, Nivarthi H, Rumi E, Milosevic JD, et al. Somatic mutations of calreticulin in myeloproliferative neoplasms. N Engl J Med. 2013;369:2379–90. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1311347.
    1. Guglielmelli P, Rotunno G, Fanelli T, Pacilli A, Brogi G, Calabresi L, et al. Validation of the differential prognostic impact of type 1/type 1-like versus type 2/type 2-like CALR mutations in myelofibrosis. Blood Cancer J. 2015;5:e360. doi: 10.1038/bcj.2015.90.
    1. Asp J, Andreasson B, Hansson U, Wasslavik C, Abelsson J, Johansson P, et al. Mutation status of essential thrombocythemia and primary myelofibrosis defines clinical outcome. Haematologica. 2016;101:e129–32. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2015.138958.
    1. JAKAFI® (ruxolitinib). Full Prescribing Information, Incyte Corporation. Wilmington, DE, 2016. Available at: . Accessed 8 Aug 2016.
    1. JAKAVI® (ruxolitinib) EU Summary of Product Characteristics. Basel, Switzerland: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation; 2015.
    1. Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Levy RS, Gupta V, DiPersio JF, et al. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:799–807. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110557.
    1. Harrison C, Kiladjian JJ, Al-Ali HK, Gisslinger H, Waltzman R, Stalbovskaya V, et al. JAK inhibition with ruxolitinib versus best available therapy for myelofibrosis. N Engl J Med. 2012;366:787–98. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1110556.
    1. Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Levy RS, Gupta V, DiPersio JF, et al. The clinical benefit of ruxolitinib across patient subgroups: analysis of a placebo-controlled, phase III study in patients with myelofibrosis. Br J Haematol. 2013;161:508–16. doi: 10.1111/bjh.12274.
    1. Verstovsek S, Mesa RA, Gotlib J, Levy RS, Gupta V, DiPersio JF, et al. Efficacy, safety, and survival with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis: results of a median 3-year follow-up of COMFORT-I. Haematologica. 2015;100:479–88. doi: 10.3324/haematol.2014.115840.
    1. Cervantes F, Vannucchi AM, Kiladjian JJ, Al-Ali HK, Sirulnik A, Stalbovskaya V, et al. Three-year efficacy, safety, and survival findings from COMFORT-II, a phase 3 study comparing ruxolitinib with best available therapy for myelofibrosis. Blood. 2013;122:4047–53. doi: 10.1182/blood-2013-02-485888.
    1. Harrison CN, Vannucchi AM, Kiladjian JJ, Al-Ali HK, Gisslinger H, Knoops L, et al. Long-term findings from COMFORT-II, a phase 3 study of ruxolitinib vs best available therapy for myelofibrosis. Leukemia. 2016;30:1701–7. doi: 10.1038/leu.2016.148.
    1. National Cancer Institute. Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v3.0 (CTCAE). Available at: . Accessed 18 Oct 2016.
    1. Cervantes F, Dupriez B, Pereira A, Passamonti F, Reilly JT, Morra E, et al. New prognostic scoring system for primary myelofibrosis based on a study of the International Working Group for Myelofibrosis Research and Treatment. Blood. 2009;113:2895–901. doi: 10.1182/blood-2008-07-170449.
    1. Mesa RA, Verstovsek S, Gupta V, Mascarenhas JO, Atallah E, Burn T, et al. Effects of ruxolitinib treatment on metabolic and nutritional parameters in patients with myelofibrosis from COMFORT-I. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2015;15:214–21. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2014.12.008.
    1. Deininger M, Radich J, Burn TC, Huber R, Paranagama D, Verstovsek S. The effect of long-term ruxolitinib treatment on JAK2p.V617F allele burden in patients with myelofibrosis. Blood. 2015;126:1551–4. doi: 10.1182/blood-2015-03-635235.
    1. Quintás-Cardama A, Vaddi K, Liu P, Manshouri T, Li J, Scherle PA, et al. Preclinical characterization of the selective JAK1/2 inhibitor INCB018424: therapeutic implications for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasms. Blood. 2010;115:3109–17. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-04-214957.
    1. Quintás-Cardama A, Kantarjian H, Cortes J, Verstovsek S. Janus kinase inhibitors for the treatment of myeloproliferative neoplasias and beyond. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011;10:127–40. doi: 10.1038/nrd3264.
    1. Mesa RA, Cortes J. Optimizing management of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis: the need for individualized dosing. J Hematol Oncol. 2013;6:79. doi: 10.1186/1756-8722-6-79.
    1. Gupta V, Harrison CN, Hexner EO, Al-Ali HK, Foltz L, Montgomery M, et al. The impact of anemia on overall survival in patients with myelofibrosis treated with ruxolitinib: an exploratory analysis of the COMFORT studies. 2015.
    1. Gangat N, Caramazza D, Vaidya R, George G, Begna K, Schwager S, et al. DIPSS plus: a refined Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System for primary myelofibrosis that incorporates prognostic information from karyotype, platelet count, and transfusion status. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:392–7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.32.2446.
    1. Quintas-Cardama A, Kantarjian H, Pierce S, Cortes J, Verstovsek S. Prognostic model to identify patients with myelofibrosis at the highest risk of transformation to acute myeloid leukemia. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2013;13:315–8. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2013.01.001.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅