Show simple item record

 
dc.contributorVall d'Hebron Barcelona Hospital Campus
dc.contributor.authorGarcia-Manero, Guillermo
dc.contributor.authorSANTINI, VALERIA
dc.contributor.authorZeidan, Amer
dc.contributor.authorKomrokji, Rami S.
dc.contributor.authorPozharskaya, Veronika
dc.contributor.authorRose, Shelonitda
dc.contributor.authorVALCARCEL, DAVID
dc.date.accessioned2025-07-11T07:18:51Z
dc.date.available2025-07-11T07:18:51Z
dc.date.issued2025-07
dc.identifier.citationGarcia-Manero G, Santini V, Zeidan AM, Komrokji RS, Pozharskaya V, Rose S, et al. Long-Term Transfusion Independence with Luspatercept Versus Epoetin Alfa in Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent-Naive, Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes in the COMMANDS Trial. Adv Ther. 2025 Jul;42:3576–3589.
dc.identifier.issn1865-8652
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11351/13398
dc.descriptionEpoetin alfa; Erythroid-stimulating agents; Myelodysplastic syndromes
dc.description.abstractIntroduction The efficacy of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) for transfusion-dependent (TD) anemia in lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (LR-MDS) is limited. Luspatercept achieved significantly greater rates of red blood cell (RBC) transfusion independence (TI) versus epoetin alfa (an ESA) in the phase 3 COMMANDS trial. This analysis assessed long-term RBC-TI, cumulative response, and safety with luspatercept in COMMANDS. Methods Eligible patients aged ≥ 18 years, with ESA-naive, RBC TD LR-MDS were randomized 1:1 to receive luspatercept (1.0 mg/kg, titration to 1.75 mg/kg permitted) or epoetin alfa (450 IU/kg, titration to 1050 IU/kg). Disease assessment was carried out at week 24 (day 169) and every 24 weeks thereafter. Treatment continued until disease progression, lack of clinical benefit, unacceptable toxicity, or consent withdrawal. Results At data cutoff (September 22, 2023; median follow-up: luspatercept 21.4 months, epoetin alfa 20.3 months), a greater proportion of patients treated with luspatercept (n = 182) versus epoetin alfa (n = 181) achieved a longest single RBC-TI period ≥ 1 year (44.5% vs. 27.6%; P = 0.0003) and ≥ 1.5 years (30.2% vs. 13.8%; P < 0.0001). Higher rates of RBC-TI ≥ 1.5 years with luspatercept over epoetin alfa were consistent across all prespecified subgroups, including patients with ring sideroblast-negative status and low baseline serum erythropoietin. Longer cumulative RBC-TI response [sum of all durations of RBC-TI for ≥ 12 weeks; week 1 to end of treatment (95% CI)] was observed with luspatercept [154.7 weeks (118.4–NR)] versus epoetin alfa [91.1 weeks (73.1–123.9)]. Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events, including asthenia and hypertension, generally decreased over time in both arms. Progression rates to high-risk MDS and acute myeloid leukemia were similarly low (< 5%) in both treatment arms. Conclusions These data demonstrated sustained, durable clinical benefit across subgroups and support luspatercept as the treatment of choice for anemia in patients with LR-MDS who are TD and ESA-naive. Trial Registration Number NCT03682536.
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherAdis
dc.relation.ispartofseriesAdvances in Therapy;42
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/
dc.sourceScientia
dc.subjectSíndromes mielodisplàsiques - Tractament
dc.subjectAnèmia - Tractament
dc.subjectSang - Transfusió
dc.subjectEritropoetina
dc.subject.meshMyelodysplastic Syndromes
dc.subject.mesh/therapy
dc.subject.meshAnemia
dc.subject.meshEpoetin Alfa
dc.subject.meshBlood Transfusion
dc.subject.meshErythrocyte Transfusion
dc.titleLong-Term Transfusion Independence with Luspatercept Versus Epoetin Alfa in Erythropoiesis-Stimulating Agent-Naive, Lower-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes in the COMMANDS Trial
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.identifier.doi10.1007/s12325-025-03208-5
dc.subject.decssíndromes mielodisplásicos
dc.subject.decs/terapia
dc.subject.decsanemia
dc.subject.decsepoetina alfa
dc.subject.decstransfusión sanguínea
dc.subject.decstransfusión de eritrocitos
dc.relation.publishversionhttps://doi.org/10.1007/s12325-025-03208-5
dc.type.versioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.audienceProfessionals
dc.contributor.organismesInstitut Català de la Salut
dc.contributor.authoraffiliation[Garcia-Manero G] MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. [Santini V] MDS Unit, DMSC, University of Florence, AOUC, Florence, Italy. [Zeidan AM] Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA. [Komrokji RS] Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA. [Pozharskaya V, Rose S] Bristol Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ, USA. [Valcárcel D] Vall d’Hebron, Institute of Oncology (VHIO), Barcelona, Spain. Vall d’Hebron Hospital Universitari, Barcelona, Spain. Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
dc.identifier.pmid40377899
dc.identifier.wos001489760700001
dc.rights.accessrightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record