What myelofibrosis therapies in development show promise? Dr. John Mascarenhas, a myelofibrosis researcher, reviews innovative treatments that are being combined with JAK inhibitors as well as single agent therapies that are making headway for patients with myelofibrosis. 

Dr. John Mascarenhas is Professor of Medicine at the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai (ISMMS) and the Director of the Adult Leukemia Program and Director of the Center of Excellence for Blood Cancers and Myeloid Disorders at Mount Sinai. Learn more about Dr. Mascarenhas.

See More from Evolve Myelofibrosis

Related Resources:

Primary vs Secondary Myelofibrosis | What’s the Difference?

Evolving Myelofibrosis Treatment Options: What You Should Know

Expert Perspective | A Concerted Effort to Advance Myelofibrosis Care

Transcript:

Katherine Banwell:

The JAK inhibitor class of therapies has been around for over a decade now. What new therapies are showing promise when being studied in combination with these therapies? 

Dr. John Mascarenhas:

So, I think the ones that are really exciting, and there are a number. We don’t know which one is the best, but I’ll tell you the ones that I think really have potential would be drugs like pelabresib, the pan-BET inhibitor, and the MANIFEST-2 study. Even a drug called navitoclax, that isn’t going to move forward, taught us a lot. We know that pathway is important, we just have to improve upon how we’re doing this.

Drugs like selinexor (Xpovio), the XPO1 inhibitor, is ongoing in the SENTRY study. A drug called navtemadlin is a very active drug, and that’s been shown as a single agent after ruxolitinib (Jakafi) failure. But now, it’s going after those patients who are not having an optimal response with ruxolitinib, adding it on on the backend.  

So, what I really love about the way we’re doing this is, I think it’s a very thoughtful approach trying to use these really active drugs that exploit non-redundant pathways in the disease, both either up front, to really get the biggest bang for your buck, to really try to reduce the diseased burden earlier on, or to try to add on as a strategy if patients aren’t enjoying the maximum benefit from ruxolitinib. So, we are really trying to tackle it from different angles and some of these drugs really look promising. 

Katherine Banwell:

Yeah, yeah. Are there other single agent therapies that are being studied for myelofibrosis?  

Dr. John Mascarenhas:

There are. So, I’ll name two that I also think really deserve some attention. One is called TP-3654, and it’s a drug by Sumitomo that’s a PIM 1 kinase inhibitor. So, this also goes after a very specific pathway – inflammatory pathway – a signaling pathway – that is known to be an important driver of disease and has very nice data, particularly from a symptom-burden perspective. But also, again, this concept of disease modulation and reduction in cytokines in patients who’ve previously been on ruxolitinib.  

So, there’s data there where they’re going to add it on to ruxolitinib that really looks like an interesting approach forward. And then the drug I think many of us are very anxious to see results in which is ongoing, is the IMpactMF study.   

This is the randomized phase three study of imetelstat (Rytelo), which is a telomerase inhibitor and infusional agent that goes after a very important enzyme that keeps malignant cells alive and really is one of the drugs that I think has the true potential to go after the stem cell, the origin of the disease, and improve survival. It’s the only study we have had, and currently have, where the endpoint for the registration phase we’ve studied is survival. It’s patients who have failed ruxolitinib and are getting this drug as a single agent, versus best available therapy.  

A very exciting trial and really important. Whether you’re on the trial or you’re a candidate for it, it really helps us move the field forward, because it gives us essential insights into the disease and how to do better. 

Katherine Banwell:

Yeah. When it comes to the latest research and treatment, what question should patients ask their health care team about new or developing treatment options? 

 Dr. John Mascarenhas:

Well, I think every patient is different, and truly different since their biology is different, the way they present is different, their course is different. So, really, the treatment options, including the trial options, really need to be tailored to the patient. It has to make sense for that patient. It has to meet their expectations, be aligned with their goals of therapy, and balance. Balance risk with potential benefit. Patients have to understand. The physicians have to present very clearly that some trials are randomized studies, and you could get a placebo. 

And it’s often blinded, so the patient doesn’t know, the physician doesn’t know. But importantly, in some of these studies, there’s crossovers, so even if you don’t get the drug up front, you can get it in the backend. All of these things really have to be disclosed very carefully and thoughtfully, so the patient’s really making an informed decision that makes sense for them and is meeting their expectations.