We present a review of critical concepts and produce recommendations on the management of Philadelphia-negative classical myeloproliferative neoplasms, including monitoring, response definition, fi ...

https://ascopubs.org/doi/pdf/10.1200/JCO.2010.31.8436

Philadelphia-Negative Classical Myeloproliferative Neoplasms: Critical Concepts and Management Recommendations From European LeukemiaNet

Background Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, was shown to have a clinical benefit in patients with polycythemia vera in a phase 2 study. We conducted a phase 3 open-label study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus standard therapy in patients with polycythemia vera who had an inadequate response to or had unacceptable side effects from hydroxyurea. Methods We randomly assigned phlebotomy-dependent patients with splenomegaly, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive ruxolitinib (110 patients) or standard therapy (112 patients). The primary end point was both hematocrit control through week 32 and at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 32, as assessed by means of imaging. Results The primary end point was achieved in 21% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group versus 1% of those in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). Hematocrit control was achieved in 60% of patients receiving ruxolitinib and 20% of those receiving standard therapy; 38% and 1% of patients in the two g...

/pdf/ruxolitinib-versus-standard-therapy-for-the-treatment-of-572344lv5v.pdf

Ruxolitinib versus Standard Therapy for the Treatment of Polycythemia Vera

A phase II A study was conducted to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Givinostat, a novel Histone-Deacetylases inhibitor, in patients with Polycythaemia Vera (PV, n = 12), Essential Thrombocythaemia (ET, n = 1) and Myelofibrosis (n = 16), bearing the JAK2V617F mutation. The study was approved by the local ethics committees and all human participants gave written informed consent. Givinostat was given orally for 24 weeks at a starting dose of 50 mg twice daily. The median treatment duration was 20 weeks. Reasons for treatment discontinuation were disease progression (n = 6), grade 2 thrombocytopenia (n = 1), psychiatric symptoms (n = 1) and withdrawn consent (n = 2). A dose reduction was applied in 10 patients while a temporary interruption occurred in 15. Among 13 PV/ET patients, 1 complete, 6 partial and 4 no responses were documented at study end while 2 patients went off-study, prematurely. Three major responses were registered among 16 MF patients. Pruritus disappeared in most patients and reduction of splenomegaly was observed in 75% of PV/ET and 38% of MF patients. Reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction identified a trend to reduction of the JAK2V617F allele burden. Givinostat was well tolerated and could induce haematological response in most PV and some MF patients.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/j.1365-2141.2010.08266.x

A pilot study of the Histone‐Deacetylase inhibitor Givinostat in patients with JAK2V617F positive chronic myeloproliferative neoplasms

Summary Background In the pivotal RESPONSE study, ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK)1 and JAK2 inhibitor, was superior to best available therapy at controlling haematocrit and improving splenomegaly and symptoms in patients with polycythaemia vera with splenomegaly who were inadequately controlled with hydroxyurea. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in controlling disease in patients with polycythaemia vera without splenomegaly who need second-line therapy. Methods RESPONSE-2 is a randomised, open-label, phase 3b study assessing ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in patients with polycythaemia vera done in 48 hospitals or clinics across 12 countries in Asia, Australia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) with polycythaemia vera, no palpable splenomegaly, and hydroxyurea resistance or intolerance were stratified by their hydroxyurea therapy status (resistance vs intolerance) and randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive response technology provider using a validated system to receive either oral ruxolitinib 10 mg twice daily or investigator-selected best available therapy (hydroxyurea [at the maximum tolerated dose], interferon or pegylated interferon, pipobroman, anagrelide, approved immunomodulators, or no cytoreductive treatment). Investigators and patients were not masked to treatment assignment; however, the study sponsor was masked to treatment assignment until database lock. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients achieving haematocrit control at week 28. Analyses were done according to an intention-to-treat principle, including data from all patients randomly assigned to treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02038036) and is ongoing but not recruiting patients. Findings Between March 25, 2014, and Feb 11, 2015, of 173 patients assessed for eligibility, 74 patients were randomly assigned to receive ruxolitinib and 75 to receive best available therapy. At randomisation, best available therapy included hydroxyurea (37 [49%] of 75 in the best available therapy group), interferon or pegylated interferon (ten [13%] of 75), pipobroman (five [7%] of 75), lenalidomide (one [1%] of 75), no treatment (21 [28%] of 75), and other (one [1%] of 75). Haematocrit control was achieved in 46 (62%) of 74 ruxolitinib-treated patients versus 14 (19%) of 75 patients who received best available therapy (odds ratio 7·28 [95% CI 3·43–15·45]; p vs two [3%] of 75 in the best available therapy group) and thrombocytopenia (two [3%] vs six [8%]). No cases of grade 3–4 anaemia or thrombocytopenia occurred with ruxolitinib; one patient (1%) reported grade 3–4 anaemia and three patients (4%) reported grade 3–4 thrombocytopenia in the group receiving best available therapy. Frequent grade 3–4 non-haematological adverse events were hypertension (five [7%] of 74 vs three [4%] of 75) and pruritus (0 of 74 vs two [3%] of 75). Serious adverse events occurring in more than 2% of patients in either group, irrespective of cause, included thrombocytopenia (none in the ruxolitinib group vs two [3%] of 75 in the best available therapy group) and angina pectoris (two [3%] of 74 in the ruxolitinib group vs none in the best available therapy group). Two deaths occurred, both in the best available therapy group. Interpretation RESPONSE-2 met its primary endpoint. The findings of this study indicate that ruxolitinib could be considered a standard of care for second-line therapy in this post-hydroxyurea patient population. Funding Novartis.

Ruxolitinib for the treatment of inadequately controlled polycythaemia vera without splenomegaly (RESPONSE-2): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b study

Assessment and prognostic value of the European LeukemiaNet criteria for clinicohematologic response, resistance, and intolerance to hydroxyurea in polycythemia vera

A unified definition of clinical resistance and intolerance to hydroxycarbamide in polycythaemia vera and primary myelofibrosis : results of a European LeukemiaNet (ELN) consensus process

A unified definition of clinical resistance and intolerance to hydroxycarbamide in polycythaemia vera and primary myelofibrosis: results of a European LeukemiaNet (ELN) consensus process

Jean Jacques Kiladijan

Papers

A unified definition of clinical resistance and intolerance to hydroxycarbamide in polycythaemia vera and primary myelofibrosis: results of a European LeukemiaNet (ELN) consensus process