Last updated on August 2019

Efficacy and Safety Study of Luspatercept (ACE-536) Versus Epoetin Alfa for the Treatment of Anemia Due to IPSS-R Very Low Low or Intermediate Risk Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) in ESA Na ve Subjects Who Require Red Blood Cell Transfusions


Brief description of study

The study will be conducted in compliance with the International Council for Harmonisation (ICH) of Technical Requirements for Registration of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use/Good Clinical Practice (GCP) and applicable regulatory requirements.

This is an interventional active-controlled, open-label, randomized Phase 3 study to compare the efficacy and safety of luspatercept (ACE-536) versus epoetin alfa for the treatment of anemia due to IPSS-R very low, low or intermediate risk MDS in ESA nave subjects who require RBC transfusions.

The study is divided into the Screening Period, a Treatment Period and a Post-Treatment Follow-up Period.

Detailed Study Description

Anemia is considered to be one of the most prevalent cytopenias in patients who have myelodysplastic syndromes, an umbrella term used to describe disorders relating to the ineffective production of red blood cells, white blood cells, and/or platelets. Ranging in severity from mild (asymptomatic) to severe, anemia can result in patients requiring regular red blood cell (RBC) transfusions, which can lead to further complications from iron overload. The goal of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of luspatercept versus epoetin alfa in anemic patients who are categorized as International Prognostic Scoring System-Revised (IPSS-R) very low, low, or intermediate risk Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), are ESA nave, and require constant RBC transfusions. The design of the study will allow a period of initial randomization of patients into either the luspatercept or epoetin alfa arm, followed by an open-label treatment period. In both treatment arms, best supportive care (BSC) may be used in combination with study treatment when clinically indicated per investigator. Best supportive care includes, but is not limited to, treatment with transfusions, antibiotic, antiviral and/or antifungal therapy, and nutritional support as needed. Best supportive care for this study excludes the use of ESAs outside of the study treatment. Patients should receive treatment up to a minimum of 24 weeks after which an MDS Disease assessment visit is scheduled to assess the response to treatment. Patients who are determined to be experiencing clinical benefit may continue treatment. Continued clinical benefit will be re-assessed every 24 weeks. Once patients are discontinued from study treatment, they will enter a post treatment follow-up period.

Clinical Study Identifier: NCT03682536

Find a site near you

Start Over

Sharp Memorial Hospital

San Diego, CA United States
  Connect »

Yale Cancer Center

New Haven, CT United States
  Connect »

Florida Cancer Institute

Hudson, FL United States
  Connect »

Moffitt Cancer Center

Tampa, FL United States
  Connect »

Florida Cancer Specialists

West Palm Beach, FL United States
  Connect »

HCA Midwest Health

Kansas City, MO United States
  Connect »

East Carolina University

Greenville, NC United States
  Connect »

Carolina Blood and Cancer Care

Rock Hill, SC United States
  Connect »

Tennessee Oncology

Nashville, TN United States
  Connect »

Utah Cancer Specialists

Salt Lake City, UT United States
  Connect »

Concord Hospital

Concord, Australia
  Connect »

Cabrini Hospital

Malvern, Australia
  Connect »

The Alfred Hospital

Melbourne, Australia
  Connect »

Icon Cancer Foundation

Auchenflower, Australia
  Connect »

Wollongong Hospital

Wollongong, Australia
  Connect »

ZNA Middelheim

Antwerpen, Belgium
  Connect »

AZ Groeninge

Kortrijk, Belgium
  Connect »

CHU Limoges

Limoges Cedex, France
  Connect »

Hotel Dieu CHU Nantes

Nantes Cedex 01, France
  Connect »

CHU Purpan

Toulouse, France
  Connect »

Marien Hospital

Dusseldorf, Germany
  Connect »

Hitachi General Hospital

Hitachi, Ibaraki, Japan
  Connect »

NTT Medical Center Tokyo

Shinagawa-ku, Tokyo, Japan
  Connect »

HagaZiekenhuis

Den Haag, Netherlands
  Connect »

Radboudumc

Nijmegen, Netherlands
  Connect »

Erasmus Medical Center

Rotterdam, Netherlands
  Connect »

Zuyderland Medisch Centrum

Sittard-Geleen, Netherlands
  Connect »

City Clinical Hospital 52

Moscow, Russian Federation
  Connect »

City Clinical Hospital 40

Moscow, Russian Federation
  Connect »

Luzerner Kantonsspital

Luzern 16, Switzerland
  Connect »

Kantonsspital Winterthur

Winterthur, Switzerland
  Connect »

Changhua Christian Hospital

Changhua City, Changhua, Taiwan
  Connect »

Kaohsiung Chang Gung Memorial Hospital

Niaosong District Kaohsiung City, Taiwan
  Connect »

National Taiwan University Hospital

Taipei, Zhongzheng Dist., Taiwan
  Connect »

Aberdeen Royal Infirmary

Aberdeen, United Kingdom
  Connect »

Royal Bournemouth Hospital

Bournemouth, United Kingdom
  Connect »

University of Oxford

Headington, Oxford, United Kingdom
  Connect »

Lincoln County Hospital

Lincoln, United Kingdom
  Connect »

Kings College Hospital

London, United Kingdom
  Connect »

Christie Hospital NHS Trust

Manchester, United Kingdom
  Connect »

Blacktown Hospital

Blacktown, Australia
  Connect »