Hagop M Kantarjian1, Pierre Fenaux2, Mikkael A Sekeres3, Jeffrey Szer4, Uwe Platzbecker5, Andrea Kuendgen6, Gianluca Gaidano7, Wieslaw Wiktor-Jedrzejczak8, Nancy Carpenter9, Bhakti Mehta10, Janet Franklin10, Aristoteles Giagounidis11. 1. Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: hkantarjian@mdanderson.org. 2. Service d'Hématologie Clinique, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris, Hôpital St Louis, Université Paris 7, Paris, France. 3. Leukemia Program, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA. 4. Clinical Haematology, Royal Melbourne Hospital and Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia. 5. Department of Internal Medicine I, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik I, Dresden, Germany. 6. Sprechstunde für MDS, AML und Myelofibrose, Klinik für Hämatologie, Onkologie und klinische Immunologie, Heinrich-Heine-University of Düsseldorf, Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik A, Düsseldorf, Germany. 7. Division of Hematology, Department of Translational Medicine, University of Eastern Piedmont, Novara, Italy. 8. Medical University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland. 9. Amgen Ltd, Uxbridge, Middlesex, UK. 10. Amgen Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 11. Klinik für Onkologie, Hämatologie und Palliativmedizin, Marien Hospital, Düsseldorf, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Treatment options for thrombocytopenia in myelodysplastic syndromes are scarce. As described previously in a randomised phase 2 study (n=250), 58 weeks of romiplostim treatment in patients with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS)-defined lower-risk (low-risk or intermediate-1 risk) myelodysplastic syndromes led to reduced platelet transfusions (p<0·0001) and increased International Working Group-defined haematological improvement-platelet rates (p<0·0001) versus placebo. However, the study drug was discontinued because of the potential risk for progression to or incorrect diagnosis or treatment for acute myeloid leukaemia, based on an acute myeloid leukaemia interim hazard ratio (HR) of 2·5; the subsequent 58-week acute myeloid leukaemia HR was 1·2 (95% CI 0·4-3·8). METHODS: This study is a 5-year follow-up of a phase 2, multicentre, double-blind trial of romiplostim treatment in patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Eligible patients were recruited at 109 centres in North America, Europe, Russia, and Australia, were aged 18-90 years, and had platelets of 20 × 109 per L or less with or without a history of bleeding or 50 × 109 platelets per L or less with a history of bleeding. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice response system with stratification by baseline platelet count (≥20 × 109 per L or <20 × 109 per L) and IPSS risk (low or intermediate-1) to receive either placebo or 750 μg romiplostim subcutaneously once per week for 58 weeks. The primary outcomes for this long-term follow-up were survival and progression to acute myeloid leukaemia. Progression to acute myeloid leukaemia was defined as either 20% blasts or more after 4 weeks from romiplostim discontinuation; as per pathology; or by initiation of antileukaemia treatment. The primary outcome was assessed per protocol in all patients with available data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00614523. FINDINGS:Patients were recruited from July 21, 2008, to Dec 16, 2010. 167 patients were assigned to receive romiplostim treatment and 83 were assigned to receive placebo. 210 (84%) of 250 patients entered the 5-year long-term follow-up (139 patients in the romiplostim group and 83 in the placebo group). At the end of follow-up, proportions of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (20 [12%] of 167 in the romiplostim group vs nine [11%] of 83 in the placebo group; HR 1·06 [95% CI 0·48-2·33]; p=0·88) and proportions who died (93 [56%] vs 54 [54%]; HR 1·03 [0·72-1·47]; p=0·89) were not significantly different between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Following the decision to stop the study drug, 5-year long-term follow-up HRs for transformation to acute myeloid leukaemia and HRs for death did not differ between patients treated with romiplostim and those treated with placebo, indicating that use of romiplostim is probably not associated with any increased risk of acute myeloid leukaemia or death, despite initial concerns. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Treatment options for thrombocytopenia in myelodysplastic syndromes are scarce. As described previously in a randomised phase 2 study (n=250), 58 weeks of romiplostim treatment in patients with International Prognostic Scoring System (IPSS)-defined lower-risk (low-risk or intermediate-1 risk) myelodysplastic syndromes led to reduced platelet transfusions (p<0·0001) and increased International Working Group-defined haematological improvement-platelet rates (p<0·0001) versus placebo. However, the study drug was discontinued because of the potential risk for progression to or incorrect diagnosis or treatment for acute myeloid leukaemia, based on an acute myeloid leukaemia interim hazard ratio (HR) of 2·5; the subsequent 58-week acute myeloid leukaemia HR was 1·2 (95% CI 0·4-3·8). METHODS: This study is a 5-year follow-up of a phase 2, multicentre, double-blind trial of romiplostim treatment in patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Eligible patients were recruited at 109 centres in North America, Europe, Russia, and Australia, were aged 18-90 years, and had platelets of 20 × 109 per L or less with or without a history of bleeding or 50 × 109 platelets per L or less with a history of bleeding. Patients were randomly assigned by interactive voice response system with stratification by baseline platelet count (≥20 × 109 per L or <20 × 109 per L) and IPSS risk (low or intermediate-1) to receive either placebo or 750 μg romiplostim subcutaneously once per week for 58 weeks. The primary outcomes for this long-term follow-up were survival and progression to acute myeloid leukaemia. Progression to acute myeloid leukaemia was defined as either 20% blasts or more after 4 weeks from romiplostim discontinuation; as per pathology; or by initiation of antileukaemia treatment. The primary outcome was assessed per protocol in all patients with available data. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00614523. FINDINGS:Patients were recruited from July 21, 2008, to Dec 16, 2010. 167 patients were assigned to receive romiplostim treatment and 83 were assigned to receive placebo. 210 (84%) of 250 patients entered the 5-year long-term follow-up (139 patients in the romiplostim group and 83 in the placebo group). At the end of follow-up, proportions of patients with acute myeloid leukaemia (20 [12%] of 167 in the romiplostim group vs nine [11%] of 83 in the placebo group; HR 1·06 [95% CI 0·48-2·33]; p=0·88) and proportions who died (93 [56%] vs 54 [54%]; HR 1·03 [0·72-1·47]; p=0·89) were not significantly different between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: Following the decision to stop the study drug, 5-year long-term follow-up HRs for transformation to acute myeloid leukaemia and HRs for death did not differ between patients treated with romiplostim and those treated with placebo, indicating that use of romiplostim is probably not associated with any increased risk of acute myeloid leukaemia or death, despite initial concerns. FUNDING: Amgen Inc.
Authors: Bhavisha A Patel; Emma M Groarke; Jennifer Lotter; Ruba Shalhoub; Fernanda Gutierrez-Rodrigues; Olga Rios; Diego Quinones Raffo; Colin O Wu; Neal S Young Journal: Blood Date: 2022-01-06 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Georgios E Christakopoulos; Todd E DeFor; Stefanie Hage; John E Wagner; Michael A Linden; Claudio Brunstein; Nelli Bejanyan; Michael R Verneris; Angela R Smith Journal: Transplant Cell Ther Date: 2021-03-02
Authors: James B Bussel; Gerald Soff; Adriana Balduzzi; Nichola Cooper; Tatiana Lawrence; John W Semple Journal: Drug Des Devel Ther Date: 2021-05-26 Impact factor: 4.162