What question did this study set out to answer?

Evaluate the efficacy of selinexor with ruxolitinib versus ruxolitinib alone in JAK inhibitor-naïve myelofibrosis patients.

Selinexor Plus Ruxolitinib in JAK Inhibitor–Naïve Myelofibrosis: Phase 3 SENTRY Trial

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Randomized trial evaluates selinexor plus ruxolitinib for spleen reduction in JAK inhibitor-naïve myelofibrosis, indicating treatment effectiveness.

Evaluate the efficacy of selinexor with ruxolitinib versus ruxolitinib alone in JAK inhibitor-naïve myelofibrosis patients.
Randomized, double-blind design with 353 patients, 2:1 allocation to treatment groups.
Co-primary endpoints included spleen volume reduction ≥35% and changes in total symptom scores after 24 weeks.
Achieved SVR35 in 49.8% of the selinexor+ruxolitinib group versus 28.0% in the placebo+ruxolitinib group (odds ratio 2.58, P<0.0001).
AbsTSS was not significantly different between groups despite symptom improvement in both (selinexor: -9.9, placebo: -10.9).
Overall survival showed a hazard ratio of 0.43 with nominal P=0.022 at 12 months follow-up.

Bose et al. (2026) studied this question.

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark

Authors

Randomized trial evaluates selinexor plus ruxolitinib for spleen reduction in JAK inhibitor-naïve myelofibrosis, indicating treatment effectiveness.

Evaluate the efficacy of selinexor with ruxolitinib versus ruxolitinib alone in JAK inhibitor-naïve myelofibrosis patients.
Randomized, double-blind design with 353 patients, 2:1 allocation to treatment groups.
Co-primary endpoints included spleen volume reduction ≥35% and changes in total symptom scores after 24 weeks.
Achieved SVR35 in 49.8% of the selinexor+ruxolitinib group versus 28.0% in the placebo+ruxolitinib group (odds ratio 2.58, P<0.0001).
AbsTSS was not significantly different between groups despite symptom improvement in both (selinexor: -9.9, placebo: -10.9).
Overall survival showed a hazard ratio of 0.43 with nominal P=0.022 at 12 months follow-up.

Bose et al. (2026) studied this question.

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

View Full Paper

Ask AI

Bookmark