Addition of navitoclax to ongoing ruxolitinib treatment in patients with myelofibrosis (REFINE): a post-hoc analysis of molecular biomarkers in a phase 2 study

Widespread clinical laboratory implementation of next-generation sequencing-based cancer testing has highlighted the importance and potential benefits of standardizing the interpretation and reporting of molecular results among laboratories. A multidisciplinary working group tasked to assess the current status of next-generation sequencing-based cancer testing and establish standardized consensus classification, annotation, interpretation, and reporting conventions for somatic sequence variants was convened by the Association for Molecular Pathology with liaison representation from the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics, American Society of Clinical Oncology, and College of American Pathologists. On the basis of the results of professional surveys, literature review, and the Working Group's subject matter expert consensus, a four-tiered system to categorize somatic sequence variations based on their clinical significances is proposed: tier I, variants with strong clinical significance; tier II, variants with potential clinical significance; tier III, variants of unknown clinical significance; and tier IV, variants deemed benign or likely benign. Cancer genomics is a rapidly evolving field; therefore, the clinical significance of any variant in therapy, diagnosis, or prognosis should be reevaluated on an ongoing basis. Reporting of genomic variants should follow standard nomenclature, with testing method and limitations clearly described. Clinical recommendations should be concise and correlate with histological and clinical findings.

Ruxolitinib, a selective inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2, has clinically significant activity in myelofibrosis. In this double-blind trial, we randomly assigned patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis to twice-daily oral ruxolitinib (155 patients) or placebo (154 patients). The primary end point was the proportion of patients with a reduction in spleen volume of 35% or more at 24 weeks, assessed by means of magnetic resonance imaging. Secondary end points included the durability of response, changes in symptom burden (assessed by the total symptom score), and overall survival. The primary end point was reached in 41.9% of patients in the ruxolitinib group as compared with 0.7% in the placebo group (P<0.001). A reduction in spleen volume was maintained in patients who received ruxolitinib; 67.0% of the patients with a response had the response for 48 weeks or more. There was an improvement of 50% or more in the total symptom score at 24 weeks in 45.9% of patients who received ruxolitinib as compared with 5.3% of patients who received placebo (P<0.001). Thirteen deaths occurred in the ruxolitinib group as compared with 24 deaths in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.50; 95% confidence interval, 0.25 to 0.98; P=0.04). The rate of discontinuation of the study drug because of adverse events was 11.0% in the ruxolitinib group and 10.6% in the placebo group. Among patients who received ruxolitinib, anemia and thrombocytopenia were the most common adverse events, but they rarely led to discontinuation of the drug (in one patient for each event). Two patients had transformation to acute myeloid leukemia; both were in the ruxolitinib group. Ruxolitinib, as compared with placebo, provided significant clinical benefits in patients with myelofibrosis by reducing spleen size, ameliorating debilitating myelofibrosis-related symptoms, and improving overall survival. These benefits came at the cost of more frequent anemia and thrombocytopenia in the early part of the treatment period. (Funded by Incyte; COMFORT-I ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00952289.).

The REMARK “elaboration and explanation” guideline, by Doug Altman and colleagues, provides a detailed reference for authors on important issues to consider when designing, conducting, and analyzing tumor marker prognostic studies.