Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28606598›Full record

Trial reportClinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia2017

Practical Measures of Clinical Benefit With Ruxolitinib Therapy: An Exploratory Analysis of COMFORT-I.

Carole B Miller, Rami S Komrokji, Ruben A Mesa, William Sun, Michael Montgomery, Srdan Verstovsek

Abstract readClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. MF management.HemaSphere · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. New Concepts of Treatment for Patients with Myelofibrosis.Current treatment options in oncology · 2019
    Review
  16. Management of Myelofibrosis-Related Cytopenias.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2018
    Review
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Carole B MillerSaint Agnes Cancer Institute, Baltimore, MD. Electronic address: cmiller@stagnes.org.
Rami S KomrokjiMoffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL.
Ruben A MesaDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Mayo Clinic Cancer Center, Scottsdale, AZ.
William SunIncyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE.
Michael MontgomeryIncyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE.
Srdan VerstovsekDivision of Cancer Medicine, Department of Leukemia, The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
TISSUE CULTURE---COREP30CA054174 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS HLTH SCIENCE CENTER · PI Lei Zheng · 1991 to 2026
$59.1M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA054174
6 · The paper itself

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

AgedBiomarkersBlood TransfusionCombined Modality TherapyDisease ManagementFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNitrilesPrimary MyelofibrosisProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrazolesPyrimidinesQuality of LifeSpleenBiomarkersNitrilesProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrazolesPyrimidinesruxolitinibCommunity hospitalsJanus kinasesMyelofibrosisMyeloproliferative disordersSplenomegaly

Identifiers

PMID28606598
PMCPMC8148882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.