Population Genetics Identifies Challenges in Analyzing Rare Variants

Geneticists have, for years, understood the nature of genome‐wide association studies using common genomic variants. Recently, however, focus has shifted to the analysis of rare variants. This presents potential problems for researchers, as rare variants do not always behave in the same way common variants do, sometimes rendering decades of solid intuition moot. In this paper, we present examples of the differences between common and rare variants. We show why one must be significantly more careful about the origin of rare variants, and how failing to do so can lead to highly inflated type I error. We then explain how to best avoid such concerns with careful understanding and study design. Additionally, we demonstrate that a seemingly low error rate in next‐generation sequencing can dramatically impact the false‐positive rate for rare variants. This is due to the fact that rare variants are, by definition, seen infrequently, making it hard to distinguish between errors and real variants. Compounding this problem is the fact that the proportion of errors is likely to get worse, not better, with increasing sample size. One cannot simply scale their way up in order to solve this problem. Understanding these potential pitfalls is a key step in successfully identifying true associations between rare variants and diseases.     

Nanomedicines: From Bench to Bedside and Beyond

Advancing nanomedicines from concept to clinic requires integration of new science with traditional pharmaceutical development. The medical and commercial success of nanomedicines is greatly facilitated when those charged with developing nanomedicines are cognizant of the unique opportunities and technical challenges that these products present. These individuals must also be knowledgeable about the processes of clinical and product development, including regulatory considerations, to maximize the odds for successful product registration. This article outlines these topics with a goal to accelerate the combination of academic innovation with collaborative industrial scientists who understand pharmaceutical development and regulatory approval requirements—only together can they realize the full potential of nanomedicines for patients.     

Early intervention in myelofibrosis and impact on outcomes: A pooled analysis of the COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II studies

Background

In a pooled analysis of the phase 3 Controlled Myelofibrosis Study With Oral JAK Inhibitor Treatment I (COMFORT-I) and COMFORT-II clinical trials, adult patients with intermediate-2 or high-risk myelofibrosis who received oral ruxolitinib at randomization or after crossover from placebo or best available therapy (BAT) had improved overall survival (OS).

Methods

This post hoc analysis of pooled COMFORT data examined relevant disease outcomes based on the disease duration (≤12 or >12 months from diagnosis) before ruxolitinib initiation.

Results

The analysis included 525 patients (ruxolitinib: ≤12 months, n = 84; >12 months, n = 216; placebo/BAT: ≤12 months, n = 66; >12 months, n = 159); the median age was 65.0–70.0 years. Fewer thrombocytopenia and anemia events were observed among patients who initiated ruxolitinib treatment earlier. At Weeks 24 and 48, the spleen volume response (SVR) was higher for patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (47.6% vs. 32.9% at Week 24, p = .0610; 44.0% vs. 26.9% at Week 48, p = .0149). In a multivariable analysis of factors associated with spleen volume reduction, a logistic regression model that controlled for confounding factors found that a significantly greater binary reduction was observed among patients with shorter versus longer disease duration (p = .022). At Week 240, OS was significantly improved among patients who initiated ruxolitinib earlier (63% [95% CI, 51%‒73%] vs. 57% [95% CI, 49%‒64%]; hazard ratio, 1.53; 95% CI, 1.01‒2.31; p = .0430). Regardless of disease duration, a longer OS was observed for patients who received ruxolitinib versus those who received placebo/BAT.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that earlier ruxolitinib initiation for adult patients with intermediate-2 and high-risk myelofibrosis may improve clinical outcomes, including fewer cytopenia events, durable SVR, and prolonged OS.

Plain Language Summary

• Patients with myelofibrosis, a bone marrow cancer, often do not live as long as the general population. These patients may also have an enlarged spleen and difficult symptoms such as fatigue.
• Two large clinical trials showed that patients treated with the drug ruxolitinib lived longer and had improved symptoms compared to those treated with placebo or other standard treatments.
• Here it was examined whether starting treatment with ruxolitinib earlier (i.e., within a year of diagnosis) provided benefits versus delaying treatment.
• Patients who received ruxolitinib within a year of diagnosis lived longer and experienced fewer disease symptoms than those whose treatment was delayed.