Dataset Information

Givinostat: an emerging treatment for polycythemia vera.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Polycythemia vera (PV), a Philadelphia chromosome-negative myeloproliferative neoplasm, is characterized by panmyelosis, pancytosis, and a JAK2 mutation. Patients are at increased risk of thrombohemorrhagic events, and progression to myelofibrosis or acute leukemia. Current treatments include aspirin, phlebotomy, and cytoreductive drugs (most commonly hydroxyurea). Givinostat is a potent, class I/II histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor that is in phase I/II clinical trials in PV. Givinostat was well tolerated and yielded promising clinico-hematological responses. A phase III study of givinostat versus hydroxyurea in high-risk PV patients is planned.

Areas covered

We present an overview of PV, current treatment guidelines, and the putative mechanism(s) of action of givinostat. We discuss the preclinical and clinical studies of givinostat in PV and briefly review approved and investigational competitor compounds.

Expert opinion

HDAC inhibitors have long been known to be active in PV, but chronic toxicities can be challenging. Givinostat, however, is active and well tolerated, and is entering a pivotal Phase III randomized trial. Givinostat offers the possibility of replacing hydroxyurea as the standard first-line cytoreductive choice for PV patients. This would completely change the current therapeutic paradigm and guidelines for PV management. Although surrogate clinical study endpoints may suffice for regulatory purposes, thrombosis reduction and prevention of disease progression remain most important to patients and clinicians.

SUBMITTER: Chifotides HT

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7534842 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and 2 inhibitor, was shown to have a clinical benefit in patients with polycythemia vera in a phase 2 study. We conducted a phase 3 open-label study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus standard therapy in patients with polycythemia vera who had an inadequate response to or had unacceptable side effects from hydroxyurea.We randomly assigned phlebotomy-dependent patients with splenomegaly, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive ruxolitinib (110 patients) or standard therapy (112 patients). The primary end point was both hematocrit control through week 32 and at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume at week 32, as assessed by means of imaging.The primary end point was achieved in 21% of the patients in the ruxolitinib group versus 1% of those in the standard-therapy group (P<0.001). Hematocrit control was achieved in 60% of patients receiving ruxolitinib and 20% of those receiving standard therapy; 38% and 1% of patients in the two groups, respectively, had at least a 35% reduction in spleen volume. A complete hematologic remission was achieved in 24% of patients in the ruxolitinib group and 9% of those in the standard-therapy group (P=0.003); 49% versus 5% had at least a 50% reduction in the total symptom score at week 32. In the ruxolitinib group, grade 3 or 4 anemia occurred in 2% of patients, and grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia occurred in 5%; the corresponding percentages in the standard-therapy group were 0% and 4%. Herpes zoster infection was reported in 6% of patients in the ruxolitinib group and 0% of those in the standard-therapy group (grade 1 or 2 in all cases). Thromboembolic events occurred in one patient receiving ruxolitinib and in six patients receiving standard therapy.In patients who had an inadequate response to or had unacceptable side effects from hydroxyurea, ruxolitinib was superior to standard therapy in controlling the hematocrit, reducing the spleen volume, and improving symptoms associated with polycythemia vera. (Funded by Incyte and others; RESPONSE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01243944.).