Explore the vast range of titles available.

Isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (IDH1) mutations occur in approximately 13% of patients with intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, a relatively uncommon cancer with a poor clinical outcome. The aim of this international phase 3 study was to assess the efficacy and safety of ivosidenib (AG-120)—a small-molecule targeted inhibitor of mutated IDH1—in patients with previously treated IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study included patients from 49 hospitals in six countries aged at least 18 years with histologically confirmed, advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma who had progressed on previous therapy, and had up to two previous treatment regimens for advanced disease, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1, and a measurable lesion as defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) with a block size of 6 and stratified by number of previous systemic treatment regimens for advanced disease to oral ivosidenib 500 mg or matched placebo once daily in continuous 28-day cycles, by means of an interactive web-based response system. Placebo to ivosidenib crossover was permitted on radiological progression per investigator assessment. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by independent central review. The intention-to-treat population was used for the primary efficacy analyses. Safety was assessed in all patients who had received at least one dose of ivosidenib or placebo. Enrolment is complete; this study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02989857. Between Feb 20, 2017, and Jan 31, 2019, 230 patients were assessed for eligibility, and as of the Jan 31, 2019 data cutoff date, 185 patients were randomly assigned to ivosidenib (n=124) or placebo (n=61). Median follow-up for progression-free survival was 6·9 months (IQR 2·8–10·9). Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo (median 2·7 months [95% CI 1·6–4·2] vs 1·4 months [1·4–1·6]; hazard ratio 0·37; 95% CI 0·25–0·54; one-sided p<0·0001). The most common grade 3 or worse adverse event in both treatment groups was ascites (four [7%] of 59 patients receiving placebo and nine [7%] of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib). Serious adverse events were reported in 36 (30%) of 121 patients receiving ivosidenib and 13 (22%) of 59 patients receiving placebo. There were no treatment-related deaths. Progression-free survival was significantly improved with ivosidenib compared with placebo, and ivosidenib was well tolerated. This study shows the clinical benefit of targeting IDH1 mutations in advanced, IDH1-mutant cholangiocarcinoma. Agios Pharmaceuticals.

Two randomized, open-label, noninferiority phase 3 trials compared the prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor vadadustat with darbepoetin alfa in patients with incident or prevalent chronic kidney disease who were undergoing dialysis. Vadadustat was noninferior to darbepoetin alfa with respect to cardiovascular safety and correction and maintenance of hemoglobin concentrations.

This randomized, phase 3 trial compared the effectiveness of roxadustat, an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, with epoetin alfa in patients undergoing hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis in China. Oral roxadustat was noninferior to parenteral epoetin alfa as therapy for anemia.

Two randomized, phase 3, open-label noninferiority trials compared vadadustat with darbepoetin alfa in patients with non–dialysis-dependent chronic kidney disease. Vadadustat, as compared with darbepoetin alfa, met the prespecified noninferiority criterion for hematologic efficacy but not for cardiovascular safety.

This trial compared the oral HIF-PHI daprodustat with conventional erythropoiesis-stimulating agents for the treatment of anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease receiving dialysis. Daprodustat was noninferior to ESAs regarding the change in the hemoglobin level from baseline and cardiovascular outcomes.

This randomized trial compared daprodustat, an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, with darbepoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease who were not undergoing dialysis. Daprodustat was noninferior to darbepoetin alfa with respect to the change in hemoglobin level and cardiovascular outcomes.

This phase 3, randomized trial in China compared the efficacy and safety of roxadustat, an oral hypoxia-inducible factor prolyl hydroxylase inhibitor, with placebo for anemia in patients with CKD who were not undergoing dialysis. Roxadustat was superior to placebo in increasing and maintaining hemoglobin levels.

The addition of the oral proteasome inhibitor ixazomib to a regimen of lenalidomide plus dexamethasone led to a significant prolongation of progression-free survival of almost 6 months, as compared with placebo, with a small increase in the risk of thrombocytopenia. Outcomes of multiple myeloma have improved substantially over the past 15 years with the introduction of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, 1 , 2 and these agents now form the backbone of therapy for multiple myeloma. 3 In phase 3 studies, triplet regimens based on these agents were shown to be more efficacious than doublet regimens when these regimens were used as a first-line treatment 4 – 6 and in relapsed disease. 7 , 8 In addition, there has been a shift in treatment patterns toward the use of extended treatment to further improve long-term outcomes, 9 and this shift highlights the need for additional effective agents with . . .

Hypomethylating drugs are the standard treatment for patients with high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. Survival is poor after failure of these drugs; there is no approved second-line therapy. We compared the overall survival of patients receiving rigosertib and best supportive care with that of patients receiving best supportive care only in patients with myelodysplastic syndromes with excess blasts after failure of azacitidine or decitabine treatment. We did this randomised controlled trial at 74 hospitals and university medical centres in the USA and Europe. We enrolled patients with diagnosis of refractory anaemia with excess blasts (RAEB)-1, RAEB-2, RAEB-t, or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia based on local site assessment, and treatment failure with a hypomethylating drug in the past 2 years. Patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive rigosertib 1800 mg per 24 h via 72-h continuous intravenous infusion administered every other week or best supportive care with or without low-dose cytarabine. Randomisation was stratified by pretreatment bone marrow blast percentage. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment assignment. The primary outcome was overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01241500. From Dec 13, 2010, to Aug 15, 2013, we enrolled 299 patients: 199 assigned to rigosertib, 100 assigned to best supportive care. Median follow-up was 19·5 months (IQR 11·9–27·3). As of Feb 1, 2014, median overall survival was 8·2 months (95% CI 6·1–10·1) in the rigosertib group and 5·9 months (4·1–9·3) in the best supportive care group (hazard ratio 0·87, 95% CI 0·67–1·14; p=0·33). The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were anaemia (34 [18%] of 184 patients in the rigosertib group vs seven [8%] of 91 patients in the best supportive care group), thrombocytopenia (35 [19%] vs six [7%]), neutropenia (31 [17%] vs seven [8%]), febrile neutropenia (22 [12%] vs ten [11%]), and pneumonia (22 [12%] vs ten [11%]). 41 (22%) of 184 patients in the rigosertib group and 30 (33%) of 91 patients in the best supportive care group died due to adverse events and three deaths were attributed to rigosertib treatment. Rigosertib did not significantly improve overall survival compared with best supportive care. A randomised phase 3 trial of rigosertib (NCT 02562443) is underway in specific subgroups of patients deemed to be at high risk, including patients with very high risk per the Revised International Prognostic Scoring System criteria. Onconova Therapeutics, Leukemia & Lymphoma Society.

Oral-drug based regimens are useful in certain circumstances for transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TI-NDMM), but few studies have compared Ixazomib based regimen with lenalidomide based regimen head-to-head. We carried out a prospective randomized, open, parallel group trial in patients with TI-NDMM in 3 China centers from March 2020 to December 2022. Sixty-three patients were available for final analysis, ICd (Ixazomib/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone, n = 31) and RCd (lenalidomide/cyclophosphamide/dexamethasone, n = 32). The primary objective was to compare the two regimens by analyzing the overall response rate (ORR), safety profiles, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We also explored clinical and the biological characteristics of the patients with primary drug resistance. Baseline characteristics were well balanced between ICd and RCd groups, with the median age 70 vs. 70 years; 12.9% vs. 12.5% of patients had stage III disease; 25.8% vs. 28.1% had high-risk cytogenetic abnormalities. The overall response rate (ORR) at the end of 4 cycles was 87.1% vs. 71.9% (odds ratio [OR], 1.212; 95% CI, 0.938–1.565; P = 0.213); the best ≥ VGPR rate was 41.9% vs. 31.2% (OR, 1.342; 95% CI 0.694–2.597; P = 0.439). Among high-risk cytogenetic patients, ORR was higher in the ICd group, 75% vs. 55.5% (P = 0.620), respectively. After 35 months follow-up, the median PFS were 22 and 23 months between ICd and RCd groups (P = 0.897). Median OS was not reached, estimated 3-year OS rate was 86.4% vs. 85.4% (P = 0.774). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were neutropenia (6.5% in the ICd group vs. 31.3% in the RCd group), anemia (19.4% vs. 18.8%), pneumonia (0 vs. 15.6%) and diarrhea (12.9% vs. 0). Treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs) induced dose reduction and discontinuation were 22.6% vs. 37.5% and 3.2% vs. 6.3% in the ICd vs. RCd group, respectively. Exploration data showed that patients with t (4;14) were insensitive to initial RCd treatment. The ICd regimen showed a tendency towards improved ORR compared to RCd regimen. Both ICd and RCd regimens demonstrated less dose reduction and treatment discontinuation, suggesting their tolerability and feasibility for older individuals with TI-NDMM. Trial registration: This study was registered at Chinese Clinical Trial Register (ChiCTR). Trial registration number: ChiCTR2000029863. Date of registration: 15/02/2020.