A phase 2/3 study of romiplostim N01 in chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT).

217 Background: CIT causes dose reduction or delay of chemotherapy (chemo), bleeding, and platelet (PLT) transfusion. This phase 2/3 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of romiplostim N01 in CIT. Methods: This trial comprising Part A (open-label) and B (randomized double-blinded) recruited patients (pts) with solid tumors or lymphoma and with CIT. In Part A, pts with a PLT count ≤200×10 9 /L before the day of chemo were included. Romiplostim N01 was injected subcutaneously per week (QW) for a 3-week chemo cycle at 1 μg/kg (group 1) or 2 μg/kg (group 2) for pts with a PLT count 100~200×10 9 /L, and at 2 μg/kg (group 3) for pts with a PLT count <100×10 9 /L. Primary endpoint was proportion of responders on the last day of chemo cycle, defined as pts who had an increase in PLT count of ≥30×10 9 /L from baseline for pts with a PLT count 100~200×10 9 /L, and an increase in PLT count of ≥30×10 9 /L or a PLT count ≥100×10 9 /L for pts with a PLT count <100×10 9 /L. In Part B, pts with a PLT count 75~150×10 9 /L were included and randomized 2:1 to receive romiplostim N01 or placebo QW at 2 μg/kg on day 1, and at 1 μg/kg on day 8 and 15 for two chemo cycles. Primary endpoint was proportion of responders, defined as pts resuming two consecutive chemo cycles without thrombocytopenia-induced dose modification (dose reduction by ≥15% or delay by ≥4 days or discontinuation) and without a rescue therapy. Results: In Part A, 50 pts were included between Mar 12, 2021 and Jul 29, 2021. The proportions of responders were 66.7% (10/15) in group 1, 53.3% (8/15) in group 2, and 90.0% (18/20) in group 3. Between Nov 8, 2022 and Jan 15, 2024, 63 pts were randomized in Part B. The proportion of responders in the romiplostim N01 group was significantly higher than that in placebo group (68.3% vs 40.9%). The adjusted rate difference was 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.1%, 50.2%). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 17 (41.5%) and 12 (54.5%) pts in the romiplostim N01 and placebo groups, of whom 1 (2.4%) and 0 were ≥grade 3. The most frequent TRAEs were nausea (12.2% vs 0), vomiting (12.2% vs 0), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (9.8% vs 4.5%). No treatment-related hemorrhage or death occurred. In pool analysis, the proportion of responders was 73.3% and 40.9% in pts treated with romiplostim N01 and placebo, respectively. The rate difference was 32.4% (95% CI: 9.2%, 52.9%). Conclusions: Romiplostim N01 showed promising efficacy and manageable safety in patients with CIT. Clinical trial information: PartA:NCT05851027 ; PartB:NCT05554913 . Pool analysis of Part A (pts with PLT count ≥75×10 9 /L) and Part B (all pts). Romiplostim N01 Placebo Rate Difference Part A+B (n=75) Part B (n=22) Romiplostim N01 (Part A+B) vs Placebo Lowest PLT count in Cycle 1, ×10 9 /L 85±41 59±32 / Highest PLT count in Cycle 1, ×10 9 /L 226±101 132±45 / Proportion of responders who completed the first chemo cycle without rescue therapy and without thrombocytopenia-induced dose modification of the second chemo cycle 55 (73.3%) 9 (40.9%) 32.4% 95% CI 61.9~82.9% 20.7~63.6% 9.2~52.9%

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
JCO Oncology Practice
Published
2024-09-30
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1200/op.2024.20.10_suppl.217
Primary Topic
Neutropenia and Cancer Infections
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

A phase 2/3 study of romiplostim N01 in chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT).

Peng Wang, Ying Han, Jinsheng Shi, Zhanyu Pan et al.
JCO Oncology Practice
Neutropenia and Cancer Infections
article

A phase 2/3 study of romiplostim N01 in chemotherapy-induced thrombocytopenia (CIT).

Peng Wang, Ying Han, Jinsheng Shi, Zhanyu Pan, Xiaoyan Kang, Zhaohong Chen, Jin Li, Qingshan Li, Zhen Wang, Meiling Wen, Zhanxiong Luo, Xiaoqin Li, Mingjun Zhang, Qingyuan Zhang, Shuang Leng, Xiaoxiao Ge, Jingde Chen, Yujie Li, Xianlin Duan, Haoran Zhang
article en

Abstract

217 Background: CIT causes dose reduction or delay of chemotherapy (chemo), bleeding, and platelet (PLT) transfusion. This phase 2/3 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of romiplostim N01 in CIT. Methods: This trial comprising Part A (open-label) and B (randomized double-blinded) recruited patients (pts) with solid tumors or lymphoma and with CIT. In Part A, pts with a PLT count ≤200×10 9 /L before the day of chemo were included. Romiplostim N01 was injected subcutaneously per week (QW) for a 3-week chemo cycle at 1 μg/kg (group 1) or 2 μg/kg (group 2) for pts with a PLT count 100~200×10 9 /L, and at 2 μg/kg (group 3) for pts with a PLT count <100×10 9 /L. Primary endpoint was proportion of responders on the last day of chemo cycle, defined as pts who had an increase in PLT count of ≥30×10 9 /L from baseline for pts with a PLT count 100~200×10 9 /L, and an increase in PLT count of ≥30×10 9 /L or a PLT count ≥100×10 9 /L for pts with a PLT count <100×10 9 /L. In Part B, pts with a PLT count 75~150×10 9 /L were included and randomized 2:1 to receive romiplostim N01 or placebo QW at 2 μg/kg on day 1, and at 1 μg/kg on day 8 and 15 for two chemo cycles. Primary endpoint was proportion of responders, defined as pts resuming two consecutive chemo cycles without thrombocytopenia-induced dose modification (dose reduction by ≥15% or delay by ≥4 days or discontinuation) and without a rescue therapy. Results: In Part A, 50 pts were included between Mar 12, 2021 and Jul 29, 2021. The proportions of responders were 66.7% (10/15) in group 1, 53.3% (8/15) in group 2, and 90.0% (18/20) in group 3. Between Nov 8, 2022 and Jan 15, 2024, 63 pts were randomized in Part B. The proportion of responders in the romiplostim N01 group was significantly higher than that in placebo group (68.3% vs 40.9%). The adjusted rate difference was 27.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.1%, 50.2%). Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 17 (41.5%) and 12 (54.5%) pts in the romiplostim N01 and placebo groups, of whom 1 (2.4%) and 0 were ≥grade 3. The most frequent TRAEs were nausea (12.2% vs 0), vomiting (12.2% vs 0), and increased aspartate aminotransferase (9.8% vs 4.5%). No treatment-related hemorrhage or death occurred. In pool analysis, the proportion of responders was 73.3% and 40.9% in pts treated with romiplostim N01 and placebo, respectively. The rate difference was 32.4% (95% CI: 9.2%, 52.9%). Conclusions: Romiplostim N01 showed promising efficacy and manageable safety in patients with CIT. Clinical trial information: PartA:NCT05851027 ; PartB:NCT05554913 . Pool analysis of Part A (pts with PLT count ≥75×10 9 /L) and Part B (all pts). Romiplostim N01 Placebo Rate Difference Part A+B (n=75) Part B (n=22) Romiplostim N01 (Part A+B) vs Placebo Lowest PLT count in Cycle 1, ×10 9 /L 85±41 59±32 / Highest PLT count in Cycle 1, ×10 9 /L 226±101 132±45 / Proportion of responders who completed the first chemo cycle without rescue therapy and without thrombocytopenia-induced dose modification of the second chemo cycle 55 (73.3%) 9 (40.9%) 32.4% 95% CI 61.9~82.9% 20.7~63.6% 9.2~52.9%

JCO Oncology PracticeVol. 20(10_suppl)
Jiangsu University (CN), Harbin Medical University (CN), Chengde Medical University (CN), Anhui Medical University (CN), Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital (CN), Liuzhou General Hospital (CN), Third Affiliated Hospital of Harbin Medical University (CN), Affiliated Hospital of Jiangsu University (CN), People's Hospital of Cangzhou (CN), Deyang Stomatological Hospital (CN), Yidu Central Hospital of Weifang (CN), Shanghai East Hospital (CN), First Affiliated Hospital of University of South China (CN), Second Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University (CN), First Affiliated Hospital of Bengbu Medical College (CN), Qilu Hospital of Shandong University (CN), University of South China (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 70%
Neutropenia and Cancer Infections
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.