Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39506073›Full record

Trial reportBone marrow transplantation2025

Impact of cytopenias and early versus late treatment with ruxolitinib in patients with steroid-refractory acute or chronic graft-versus-host disease.

Zahra Mahmoudjafari, Valkal Bhatt, John Galvin, Zhenyi Xue, Robert Zeiser, Franco Locatelli, Gérard Socié, Mohamad Mohty

Abstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled TrialClinical Trial, Phase III
In one paragraph

Trial report in Bone marrow transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Steroid-Refractory Cutaneous Graft-versus-Host Disease: a Case ReportRevista de la Facultad de Ciencias Medicas (Cordoba, Argentina) · 2026
    Article
  3. Symptom distress evolution over the first year after allogeneic stem cell transplantation - a prospective observational sub-study of the SMILe project.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Observational
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

8 authors.

Zahra MahmoudjafariUniversity of Kansas Cancer Center, Westwood, KS, USA. zmahmoudjafari@kumc.edu.ORCID 0000-0002-3168-2521
Valkal BhattIncyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE, USA.
John GalvinIncyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE, USA.
Zhenyi XueIncyte Corporation, Wilmington, DE, USA.
Robert ZeiserUniversity Medical Center Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-6565-3393
Franco LocatelliIRCCS Ospedale Pediatrico Bambino Gesù, Rome, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7976-3654
Gérard SociéHôpital Saint-Louis Hematology Transplantation & University Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-2114-7533
Mohamad MohtyHôpital Saint-Antoine Hospital and Sorbonne University, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7264-808X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

REACH2 and REACH3 were randomized, multicenter, open-label phase 3 studies comparing the selective Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor ruxolitinib versus investigators' choice of best available therapy (BAT) in steroid-refractory (SR) acute (REACH2) or chronic (REACH3) graft-versus-host disease (aGVHD/cGVHD). Moderate-severe aGVHD/cGVHD can progress rapidly; thus, key clinical considerations driving management of patients with SR-aGVHD/SR-cGVHD are prompt treatment initiation and concomitant cytopenias. These post hoc analyses of REACH2/REACH3 describe the impact of timing of treatment initiation after SR-aGVHD/SR-cGVHD diagnosis and development of concomitant cytopenias on treatment outcomes. Ruxolitinib initiation within 3 days from SR-aGVHD diagnosis yielded an extended duration of response and higher Day 28 complete response rates compared with initiation ≥7 days after SR-aGVHD diagnosis (median 178 vs 167 days and 36.6% vs 25.0%, respectively). For patients with SR-cGVHD, Week 24 overall response was not impacted by time to treatment (54.5% vs 42.6% for <14 vs >28 days). Clinically relevant cytopenias were manageable, allowing for maintenance of dose intensity (median 20 mg/d), and did not impact the favorable efficacy outcomes from ruxolitinib treatment. This analysis highlights the practical importance of considering earlier ruxolitinib initiation after SR diagnosis in GVHD and the benefits of ruxolitinib treatment compared with BAT even for patients with cytopenias.

Indexed as

Graft vs Host DiseasePyrazolesAcute DiseaseAdultAgedChronic DiseaseCytopeniaFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNitrilesPyrimidinesNitrilesPyrazolesPyrimidinesruxolitinib

Identifiers

PMID39506073
PMCPMC11726446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.