Trial reportClinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia2017
Practical Measures of Clinical Benefit With Ruxolitinib Therapy: An Exploratory Analysis of COMFORT-I.
Trial report in Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
17 citing papers in PubMed.
- Pelabresib plus ruxolitinib for JAK inhibitor-naive myelofibrosis: a randomized phase 3 trial.Nature medicine · 2025Trial
- Phase 2 study of add-on parsaclisib for patients with myelofibrosis and suboptimal response to ruxolitinib: final results.Blood advances · 2024Trial
- Association of frailty with clinical outcomes in myelofibrosis: a retrospective cohort study.British journal of haematology · 2021Trial
- Evaluation of an alternative ruxolitinib dosing regimen in patients with myelofibrosis: an open-label phase 2 study.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2018Trial
- A model to estimate spleen volume from palpated spleen length in patients with myelofibrosis.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Pacritinib Response Is Associated With Overall Survival in Myelofibrosis: PERSIST-2 Landmark Analysis of Survival.European journal of haematology · 2025Article
- Management of Patients with Early Myelofibrosis: A Discussion of Best Practices.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2024Review
- SOHO State of the Art Updates and Next Questions: Novel Therapeutic Strategies in Development for Myelofibrosis.Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia · 2023Review
- Article
- Novel strategies for challenging scenarios encountered in managing myelofibrosis.Leukemia & lymphoma · 2022Article
- Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis: a retrospective and multicenter experience in TurkeyTurkish journal of medical sciences · 2021Article
- JAK Inhibition for the Treatment of Myelofibrosis: Limitations and Future Perspectives.HemaSphere · 2020Review
- MF management.HemaSphere · 2019Article
- Innovation in Regulatory Science Is Meeting Evolution of Clinical Evidence Generation.Clinical pharmacology and therapeutics · 2019Article
- New Concepts of Treatment for Patients with Myelofibrosis.Current treatment options in oncology · 2019Review
- Management of Myelofibrosis-Related Cytopenias.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2018Review
- Janus kinase inhibition and symptom control in myeloproliferative neoplasms.Current medical research and opinion · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe phase III COMFORT (Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral JAK inhibitor Treatment)-I and COMFORT-II trials in patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis (MF) showed that ruxolitinib was superior to placebo and best available therapy, respectively, for improvements in spleen volume, MF-related symptoms, and overall survival (OS). However, patients managed in community settings might not have access to the methods used in the COMFORT trials. In this exploratory analysis we summarize efficacy findings of COMFORT-I using practical, community-oriented measures of patient outcomes. PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this post hoc analysis of data from COMFORT-I we evaluated changes from baseline to week 12 in spleen size (palpable length and volume), patient-reported outcomes (Patient Global Impression of Change; Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form; Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement System Fatigue Scale), body weight, and serum albumin levels in 5 subgroups of ruxolitinib-treated patients on the basis of week 12 spleen length changes from baseline: (1-4) ≥ 50%, 25% to < 50%, 10% to < 25%, or < 10% reduction; and (5) worsening. OS was evaluated in ruxolitinib-treated patients with week 12 spleen length reductions from baseline ≥ 50%, 25% to < 50%, or < 25% (including worsening).
resultsIn all spleen length subgroups, including patients with worsening spleen length at week 12, ruxolitinib (n = 150) was associated with improvements in spleen volume, patient-reported symptom burden, body weight, and serum albumin levels. Greater reductions in spleen length were associated with prolonged OS.
conclusionA variety of assessment methods beyond palpable spleen length that are easily accessible in the community setting might be useful in evaluating the clinical benefit of ruxolitinib over time in patients with MF.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.