Anemia is a frequent manifestation of myelofibrosis (MF) and there is an unmet need for effective treatments in anemic MF patients. The REALISE phase 2 study (NCT02966353) evaluated the efficacy and ...safety of a novel ruxolitinib dosing strategy with a reduced starting dose with delayed up-titration in anemic MF patients. Fifty-one patients with primary MF (66.7%), post-essential thrombocythemia MF (21.6%), or post-polycythemia vera MF (11.8%) with palpable splenomegaly and hemoglobin <10 g/dl were included. Median age was 67 (45-88) years, 41.2% were female, and 18% were transfusion-dependent. Patients received 10 mg ruxolitinib b.i.d. for the first 12 weeks, then up-titrations of up to 25 mg b.i.d. were permitted, based on efficacy and platelet counts. Overall, 70% of patients achieved a ≥50% reduction in palpable spleen length at any time during the study. The most frequent adverse events leading to dose interruption/adjustment were thrombocytopenia (17.6%) and anemia (11.8%). Patients who had a dose increase had greater spleen size and higher white blood cell counts at baseline. Median hemoglobin levels remained stable and transfusion requirements did not increase compared with baseline. These results reinforce the notion that it is unnecessary to delay or withhold ruxolitinib because of co-existent or treatment-emergent anemia.
Non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis is a rare disease which seldom affects adults. We report a case of a 32-year-old Bulgarian woman living with HIV. She developed severe anemia, extreme splenomegaly, ...requiring splenectomy and vertebral tumor formations leading to fracture. The diagnosis was confirmed by histological examination of the spleen, but subsequently questioned and a cumulative disease was discussed. After genetic testing, a cumulative disease was ruled out and the condition was determined to be Non-Langerhans cell histiocytosis. According to literature data, the disease has a high mortality rate. However, in our case, we should also note that there was a delay in diagnosis by several months due to difficulties in the clarification of the hematological disorder.
Selinexor combined with dexamethasone has shown activity in patients with heavily pre-treated multiple myeloma. In a phase 1b/2 study, the combination of oral selinexor with bortezomib (a proteasome ...inhibitor) and dexamethasone induced high response rates with low rates of peripheral neuropathy, the main dose-limiting toxicity of bortezomib. We aimed to evaluate the clinical benefit of weekly selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone versus standard bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma.
This phase 3, randomised, open-label trial was done at 123 sites in 21 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older, who had multiple myeloma, and who had previously been treated with one to three lines of therapy, including proteasome inhibitors, were randomly allocated (1:1) to receive selinexor (100 mg once per week), bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 once per week), and dexamethasone (20 mg twice per week), or bortezomib (1·3 mg/m2 twice per week for the first 24 weeks and once per week thereafter) and dexamethasone (20 mg four times per week for the first 24 weeks and twice per week thereafter). Randomisation was done using interactive response technology and stratified by previous proteasome inhibitor therapy, lines of treatment, and multiple myeloma stage. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Patients who received at least one dose of study treatment were included in the safety population. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03110562. The trial is ongoing, with 55 patients remaining on randomised therapy as of Feb 20, 2020.
Of 457 patients screened for eligibility, 402 were randomly allocated—195 (49%) to the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 207 (51%) to the bortezomib and dexamethasone group—and the first dose of study medication was given between June 6, 2017, and Feb 5, 2019. Median follow-up durations were 13·2 months IQR 6·2–19·8 for the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 16·5 months 9·4–19·8 for the bortezomib and dexamethasone group. Median progression-free survival was 13·93 months (95% CI 11·73–not evaluable) with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone and 9·46 months (8·11–10·78) with bortezomib and dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·70 95% CI 0·53–0·93, p=0·0075). The most frequent grade 3–4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia (77 39% of 195 patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group vs 35 17% of 204 in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group), fatigue (26 13% vs two 1%), anaemia (31 16% vs 20 10%), and pneumonia (22 11% vs 22 11%). Peripheral neuropathy of grade 2 or above was less frequent with selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (41 21% patients) than with bortezomib and dexamethasone (70 34% patients; odds ratio 0·50 95% CI 0·32–0·79, p=0·0013). 47 (24%) patients in the selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone group and 62 (30%) in the bortezomib and dexamethasone group died.
A once-per-week regimen of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone is a novel, effective, and convenient treatment option for patients with multiple myeloma who have received one to three previous lines of therapy.
Karyopharm Therapeutics.
Erythropoiesis-stimulating agents are first choice for treating anemia in low-risk MDS. This double-blind, placebo-controlled study assessed the efficacy and safety of epoetin-α in IPSS low- or ...intermediate-1 risk (i.e., low-risk) MDS patients with Hb ≤ 10.0 g/dL, with no or moderate RBC transfusion dependence (≤4 RBC units/8 weeks). Patients were randomized, 2:1, to receive epoetin-α 450 IU/kg/week or placebo for 24 weeks, followed by treatment extension in responders. The primary endpoint was erythroid response (ER) through Week 24. Dose adjustments were driven by weekly Hb-levels and included increases, and dose reductions/discontinuation if Hb > 12 g/dL. An independent Response Review Committee (RRC) blindly reviewed all responses, applying IWG-2006 criteria but also considering dose adjustments, drug interruptions and longer periods of observation.A total of 130 patients were randomized (85 to epoetin-α and 45 to placebo). The ER by IWG-2006 criteria was 31.8% for epoetin-α vs 4.4% for placebo (p < 0.001); after RRC review, the ER was 45.9 vs 4.4% (p < 0.001), respectively. Epoetin-α reduced RBC transfusions and increased the time-to-first-transfusion compared with placebo.Thus, epoetin-α significantly improved anemia outcomes in low-risk MDS. IWG-2006 criteria for ER may require amendments to better apply to clinical studies.