A very special interview with Nona Baker Co Chair of MPN Voice & Professor Claire Harrison

[Debinha]

In this interview Professor Claire Harrison shares breaking news with up to date results from the MAJIC PV Study. Following a recent media article it also clarifies and reassures the importance of existing, very successful therapies such as Hydroxycarbamide and Interferons, which are used and reviewed as necessary in each patients individual journeyyoutu.be/Pl3SWeZo0sA(Not working as expected?)

[monarch5000]

The interview shows deep divisions still exist among MPN specialists about the disease modifying capabilities of interferon. In the interview at the 3:59 mark, Dr. Claire Harrison said: "there's no evidence that this treatment [interferon] does anything other than reduce the risk of blood clotting and there's no evidence, so far, that it reduces the risk of disease transformation."

By contrast, the American specialists at the Silver MPN Center in New York City have said: "the survival benefit of interferon [compared to hydroxyurea and venesection-only] and the reduced risk of fibrosis are independent of age. This study supports the early use of interferon for PV, especially in younger patients who should not be deprived of a disease modifying therapy for being "low [blood clot] risk" by consensus criteria." imagizer.imageshack.com/img...

[FG251 in reply to monarch5000]

Well spotted. The images were too small to see all the results tables, so I wonder how many - if any - ‘progressed’? Maybe the endpoint of this study was different? I don’t know, I’m floundering here, but I do wish there were more emphasis on preventing disease progression in the whole MPN medical community, since that is what seems to concern us most and since thromboses are probably easier to prevent by controlling counts and through medication.

[hunter5582 in reply to monarch5000]

Also of note is that Dr. Harrison notes that 11 of 13 patients on interferon-only achieved a molecular response in this study (minute 14:00). She goes on to say that that VAF reduction is associated with better event free survival. Further study is needed about the significance of VAF.

The MAJIC-PV study clearly supports for the viability of ruxolitinib for treating PV when compared to BAT. Hopefully this will lead to approval in England and other countries where it is not available.

Thanks to all the researchers who put the effort into a long-term study. Thanks to MPN Voice for supporting research and posting such excellent presentations.

[Wyebird]

thank you for sharing. Brilliant video.

Thanks to all those amazing scientists and medical staff

[ainslie]

interesting vid , I too was surprised CH said Inf had no disease modifying ability, as previously posted I don’t think Inf’s disease modifying ability is as good as many claim I was and maybe still am of the impression it can for a small minority, then again CH is one of the best and probably one of the most up to date. So perhaps a reality check for some.Great to hear for us on Rux it attacks the stem cells.

[ainslie in reply to ainslie]

that should have said it was as opposed to I was, typo

[EPguy]

Some notes on the discussion:

-Majic PV is the 1st well designed PV study for Rux.

It is like others before with pts for whom HU did not work (only ~25% were tolerant /responsive to HU, brings up question, why are the others allowed to continue HU as BAT) . (RuxoBeat is ongoing with HU tolerant pts, might expect better results for Rux)

HC resistance >5x increase of death. I posted recently on this source, it's a 2012 study.

ashpublications.org/blood/a...

--

Majic study was 10 years:

Many pts used IFN as BAT (27% included IFN) so some of the comparison is to IFN.

CHR more likely on Rux vs HU. Discontinue on Rux is less likely

Number of plebs correlated to risk of thrombosis. This is new info she said.

No advantage for Rux on prog free nor overall survival, except thrombosis. (this conflicts with info below, not sure this context.)

CHR is essential for reduced events on either drug, this includes WBC. CHR matters more than which drug for event free.

Rux affects stem cells so it's clearing these deep acting cells.

>50% reduction in VAF, esp at 1 year, is important for EFS (event free survival) (Prior posts have shown this large benefit)

>50% at any point is also useful.

Rux pts had lower symptom burden.

Disease modification suggested similar to IFN.

--

Mithradate Study

This study will explicitly look to benefit of VAF reductions.

--

There are a lot of studies for the new gene tech on CALR.

Host notes that HU can work well for a very long time. (She's on it Dx 1991) Dr Harrison says for thousands of pts it is very effective and safe, as is IFN.