Detailed Information on Publication Record
2023
Momelotinib in Myelofibrosis Patients With Thrombocytopenia: Post Hoc Analysis From Three Randomized Phase 3 Trials
KILADJIAN, Jean-Jacques, Alessandro M VANNUCCHI, Aaron T GERDS, Vikas GUPTA, Srdan VERSTOVSEK et. al.Basic information
Original name
Momelotinib in Myelofibrosis Patients With Thrombocytopenia: Post Hoc Analysis From Three Randomized Phase 3 Trials
Authors
KILADJIAN, Jean-Jacques (guarantor), Alessandro M VANNUCCHI, Aaron T GERDS, Vikas GUPTA, Srdan VERSTOVSEK, Miklos EGYED, Uwe PLATZBECKER, Jiří MAYER (203 Czech Republic, belonging to the institution), Sebastian GROSICKI, Arpad ILLES, Tomasz WOZNY, Stephen T OH, Donal MCLORNAN, Ilya KIRGNER, Sung-Soo YOON, Claire N HARRISON, Barbara KLENCKE, Mei HUANG, Jun KAWASHIMA and Ruben MESA
Edition
HemaSphere, Philadelphia, Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2023, 2572-9241
Other information
Language
English
Type of outcome
Článek v odborném periodiku
Field of Study
30205 Hematology
Country of publisher
United States of America
Confidentiality degree
není předmětem státního či obchodního tajemství
References:
Impact factor
Impact factor: 6.600 in 2022
RIV identification code
RIV/00216224:14110/23:00132498
Organization unit
Faculty of Medicine
UT WoS
001096083700001
Keywords in English
Momelotinib; Myelofibrosis Patients; Thrombocytopenia
Tags
International impact, Reviewed
Změněno: 3/3/2024 21:15, Mgr. Eva Dubská
Abstract
V originále
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 x 109/L) from randomized phase 3 studies: MOMENTUM (momelotinib versus danazol; JAK inhibitor experienced); SIMPLIFY-1 (momelotinib versus ruxolitinib; JAK inhibitor naive); 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.