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

Lung Cancer

Maxwell Oluwole Akanbi, MD, PhD, on Lung Cancer: The Effect of Screening on the Incidence of Advanced Disease

Maxwell Oluwole Akanbi, MD, PhD, of McLaren Regional Medical Center, discusses the study he conducted, using the SEER database, to evaluate the impact of lung cancer screening recommendations on low-dose CT scanning. The data suggest that guidelines from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force led to a more rapid decline in the incidence of advanced disease in the United States, especially among minority populations (Abstract 10506).

Neuroendocrine Tumors

Mairéad G. McNamara, PhD, MBBCh, on Neuroendocrine Carcinoma: Findings on Liposomal Irinotecan Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid or Docetaxel

Mairéad G. McNamara, PhD, MBBCh, of The Christie NHS Foundation Trust, discusses phase II findings of the NET-02 trial, which explored an unmet need in the second-line treatment of patients with progressive, poorly differentiated extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma. In the trial, the combination of liposomal irinotecan, fluorouracil, and folinic acid, but not docetaxel, met the primary endpoint of 6-month progression-free survival rate (Abstract 4005).

Breast Cancer

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, on Breast Cancer: Latest Findings on Fulvestrant or Exemestane With or Without Ribociclib

Ann H. Partridge, MD, MPH, of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, and Kevin Kalinsky, MD, of Winship Cancer Institute at Emory University, discuss phase II findings from the MAINTAIN trial, which showed a benefit in progression-free survival for patients with hormone receptor–positive/HER2-negative metastatic breast cancer when they switched to endocrine therapy and received ribociclib after disease progression on another CDK4/6 inhibitor (Abstract LBA1004).

Leukemia

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, and Jorge E. Cortes, MD, on CML: New Efficacy and Safety Results for Asciminib

Courtney D. DiNardo, MD, MSCE, of The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, and Jorge E. Cortes, MD, of Georgia Cancer Center at Augusta University, discuss phase III results from the ASCEMBL trial, which showed that after more than 2 years of follow-up, asciminib continued to yield superior efficacy and better safety and tolerability vs bosutinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase. These results continue to support the use of this kinase inhibitor as a new CML therapy, says Dr. Cortes, with the potential to transform the standard of care (Abstract 7004).

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