Advertisement


Ruben A. Mesa, MD, on Myelofibrosis: Phase III Results on Momelotinib vs Danazol

2022 ASCO Annual Meeting

Advertisement

Ruben A. Mesa, MD, of Mays Cancer Center at UT Health San Antonio MD Anderson Cancer Center, discusses new findings from the MOMENTUM study. This trial showed that in symptomatic and anemic patients with myelofibrosis, momelotinib was superior to danazol for symptom and spleen responses, as well as transfusion requirements (Abstract 7002).



Transcript

Disclaimer: This video transcript has not been proofread or edited and may contain errors.
Myelofibrosis in 2022 continues to have significant unmet needs. We currently have now three approved drugs in the disease's background, ruxolitinib, fedratinib, and now pacritinib most recently. Still the issue of anemia remains a difficult issue in myelofibrosis as we try to holistically treat patients with the disease. The MOMENTUM study, which I presented on behalf of investigators at the 2022 ASCO meeting in Chicago was a phase three randomized clinical trial. The third phase three trial performed for momelotinib, where two prior studies that had demonstrated benefits in terms of improving splenomegaly symptoms, and anemia. The SIMPLIFY-1 study, which was a frontline study and the SIMPLIFY-2 study. Now there was still critical additional data, which was required to really fulfill the momelotinib story. So the MOMENTUM study was designed. As background momelotinib is a JAK 1 and JAK 2 inhibitor, but also inhibits ACVR1, which we feel inhibits hepcidin that helps to improve potentially anemia in myelofibrosis. So the MOMENTUM study is a randomized study of momelotinib versus an active control arm of danazol for patients who were symptomatic, they were anemic and they had previously failed JAK inhibitor therapy with ruxolitinib. They were randomized two to one between momelotinib and danazol. We found that the study was positive and met all of its primary endpoints as we reported at the ASCO meeting. First, it was clearly superior for control of symptoms as measured by the MPN symptom assessment form. Second, it was non-inferior for anemia by its primary endpoint, as it related to anemia with an improvement in transfusion independence from 13% to 31% on the momelotinib arm and 15 to 20% on the danazol arm. So danazol had activity, it was an active control arm. We felt that it was a very valuable, appropriate comparator for momelotinib. And overall the trend was certainly superior for momelotinib versus danazol, but at least non-inferior, which had been the endpoint on the study. By additional analysis as we look at transfusion free for the whole study period, it was clear that momelotinib was superior to danazol for that piece. Finally, it was clearly superior for improvement in splenomegaly. Whether we look at a 35% cut off by volume, which is the traditional endpoint or this being a second line study, we also looked at a 25% improvement in splenomegaly, which was 40% versus a much smaller percentage from danazol was highly statistically significant. So the takeaways, momelotinib was clearly superior to danazol on randomized phase three blinded clinical-controlled trial in terms of improvements in splenomegaly symptoms and anemia. We believe that in addition with the data which we already have from momelotinib and SIMPLIFY-1, and SIMPLIFY-2, this really constitutes a very profound, robust set of data for momelotinib to have it hopefully become registered as an option for patients with myelofibrosis, particularly if they suffer from splenomegaly symptoms and anemia. We presented additional data at the ASCO 2022 meeting, as it related to momelotinib and momentum. My colleague, Dr. Aaron Gerds presented an additional analysis where we were looking at the data for individuals who had significant thrombocytopenia and the anemia of thrombocytopenia are sometimes concurrent. On the MOMENTUM study. Anyone was eligible who had a platelet count of over 25,000. So looking at both individuals with a platelet count of under a hundred thousand and under 50,000, one we saw significant efficacy and safety in both of those groups, superiority versus danazol, which we had fully expected, but also really there could be used safely, even in those settings with significant thrombocytopenia. We think that's particularly helpful in that this phenotype of cytopenic myelofibrosis sometimes both anemia and thrombocytopenia can be concurrent and it makes it more relevant and a broader option, potentially for momelotinib in these patients.

Related Videos

Issues in Oncology
Global Cancer Care

Clifford A. Hudis, MD, and Karen E. Knudsen, PhD, MBA, on How ASCO and the American Cancer Society Are Collaborating to Help Patients With Cancer

Clifford A. Hudis, MD, of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and Karen E. Knudsen, PhD, MBA, of the American Cancer Society, discuss their collaboration, pooling their research and education resources to help empower patients with cancer and their families. Within 48 hours, Drs. Hudis and Knudsen were able to gear up a rapid response to the crisis in Ukraine, forming a clinical corps of volunteers to post information online in multiple languages, which helped patients navigate their care in the war-torn region. To date, 300 European cancer organizations have joined their efforts.

Head and Neck Cancer

Sue S. Yom, MD, PhD, on Oropharyngeal Cancer and the Feasibility of a Cell-Free DNA Plasma Assay

Sue S. Yom, MD, PhD, of the University of California, San Francisco, discusses a translational analysis from the NRG-HN002 study. This phase II trial established the feasibility of the tumor tissue–modified viral (TTMV) human papillomavirus DNA assay in clinical trial specimens. The goal is to use such an assay to measure tumor volume, levels of TTMV over the course of treatment, and the association of TTMV to treatment outcomes (Abstract 6006).

 

Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD: In It for the Long Haul: Outcomes in Hormone Receptor–Positive Breast Cancer

Nancy Davidson, MD, of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, reviews results from four abstracts about the importance of long-term follow-up in studies of adjuvant endocrine therapy for hormone receptor–positive breast cancer. Because the natural history of hormone receptor–positive breast cancer is long, an effort is underway to improve selection of patients by clinical parameters or biomarkers, refine the endocrine therapy background, and administer more effective combinations of endocrine therapy with other agents.

Colorectal Cancer
Genomics/Genetics

Michael J. Overman, MD, and Smitha Krishnamurthi, MD, on RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Refining Treatment Strategy

Michael J. Overman, MD, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Smitha Krishnamurthi, MD, of the Cleveland Clinic, review three abstracts, all of which enrolled patients with newly diagnosed RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer with left-sided primary tumors. The discussion centers on what the study results indicate about the use of an EGFR therapy and weighing the risk to quality of life from rash, in particular (Abstracts LBA3503, LBA3504, LBA3505).

Gynecologic Cancers

Bradley J. Monk, MD, on Ovarian Cancer: New Data on Rucaparib Monotherapy vs Placebo as Maintenance Treatment

Bradley J. Monk, MD, of the University of Arizona College of Medicine and Creighton University School of Medicine, discusses phase III findings from the ATHENA–MONO (GOG-3020/ENGOT-ov45) trial. It showed that rucaparib as first-line maintenance treatment, following first-line platinum-based chemotherapy, improved progression-free survival in patients with ovarian cancer, irrespective of homologous recombination deficiency status (Abstract LBA5500).

Advertisement

Advertisement




Advertisement