Propensity score matching analysis comparing the efficacy of Ruxolitinib to historical controls in second-line or beyond treatment for chronic GvHD after steroid failure.

Established first-line therapy for chronic graft-versus-host disease (cGvHD) comprises corticosteroids with/without calcineurin inhibitors, but about half of cGvHD patients are refractory to corticosteroid therapy. The present study retrospectively analyzed treatment outcomes in 426 patients and undertook a propensity-score matching (PSM) analysis between ruxolitinib (RUX) treated group and a historical group of cGvHD patients treated with best available treatment (BAT). PSM process adjusted unbalanced risk factors between the 2 groups, including GvHD severity, HCT-CI score, and treatment line, extracting 88 patients (44 in BAT/RUX groups each) for final analysis. In PSM subgroup, RUX group showed 74.7% 12 months' FFS rate vs 19.1% for BAT group (p < 0.001), whereas 12 months' OS rates were 89.2% and 77.7%, respectively. Multivariate analysis for FFS confirmed RUX superiority over BAT together with HCT-CI score 0-2 vs ≥3. For OS, RUX was superior to BAT, while age ≥60 years and severe grade cGvHD adversely impacted OS. In PSM subgroup, at months 0, 3, and 6, 4.5%, 12.2% and 22.2% more patients in RUX group could discontinue prednisone compared to BAT group, respectively. In conclusion, the current study showed that for FFS, RUX was superior to BAT as second-line therapy or beyond in cGvHD patients after therapy failure.

A Multicenter, Retrospective Study Evaluating Clinical Outcomes of Ruxolitinib Therapy In Heavily Pretreated Chronic GVHD Patients With Steroid Failure.

Although ruxolitinib is emerging as the treatment of choice for steroid-refractory or -dependent chronic graft versus host disease (cGVHD) based on randomized control trial data, there is relatively little real-world data published on ruxolitinib for this indication. We wanted to evaluate the real-world efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in cGVHD patients who have failed any previous systemic therapy for cGVHD. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of ruxolitinib in 115 heavily pretreated patients with steroid-refractory or -dependent chronic GVHD across 5 transplantation centers. The majority of the study population had severe cGVHD (60%) and received ruxolitinib at the fourth treatment line or beyond (82%, n = 96). The median duration of follow-up in this study population was 13 months. The overall response rate (ORR) was 48.6%, 54.9%, and 48.5% at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Clinical benefit (an outcome metric combining ORR with steroid reduction) was observed in 58.7%, 64.8%, and 60.6% of patients at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. Approximately one third of patients (37.9%) were able to discontinue prednisone at 12 months, and 63.8% were able to taper prednisone to a daily dose <0.1 mg/kg at 12 months. Failure-free survival at 12 months was 64.6% (54.1%-73.2%). Multivariate analysis identified that patients with severe cGVHD were at a higher risk of failure because of a therapy switch, whereas a pretransplantation hematopoietic stem cell transplantation-comorbidity index score ≥ 3 was associated with a high risk of failure because of increasing risk of non-relapse mortality. Overall, this study demonstrates the therapeutic efficacy of ruxolitinib for cGVHD in a heavily pretreated real-world population.