Meta-Analysis for Luspatercept in Lower-Risk MDS: Key Takeaways
- Data from a meta-analysis of clinical trials and real-world studies showed that luspatercept was efficacious and safe in the treatment of anemia in patients with lower-risk MDS.
- Lack of ESA exposure and RS-positive disease were linked with improved RBC-TI rates with luspatercept.
- Study authors concluded that this analysis further supports the use of luspatercept for patients with transfusion-dependent, lower-risk MDS who aim to achieve early and sustained RBC-TI.
How was this meta-analysis of luspatercept conducted?
In August 2023, the FDA approved luspatercept for the treatment of anemia without prior use of an erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA) in adult patients with very low–to-intermediate-risk MDS who may require RBC transfusions.2 This regulatory decision was supported by data from the phase 3 COMMANDS trial (NCT03682536), in which luspatercept generated improvements in RBC-TI and increased hemoglobin levels vs epoetin alfa, irrespective of RS status.
In this meta-analysis, investigators sought to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the efficacy and safety of luspatercept in patients with lower-risk MDS via data from clinical trials and real-world studies.1
Using database searches, investigators identified studies evaluating luspatercept that included more than 15 patients with transfusion-dependent lower-risk MDS. Investigators then excluded any studies that met any of the following criteria:
- Studies that investigated luspatercept in patients with diseases other than lower-risk MDS
- Review articles, meta-analyses, or systematic reviews
- Preclinical studies
- Duplicate publications from the same cohort of patients
- Studies where more than half the patients were transfusion independent
- Studies with insufficient reported data regarding the primary outcome of RBC-TI
- Studies published in languages other than English
In total, 854 unique studies were identified after duplicate records were removed; 655 were ultimately excluded. Further evaluation of the remaining studies left 20 available for the meta-analysis.
The primary objective of the analysis was to evaluate the proportion of patients achieving RBC-TI at 8 weeks. Secondary end points included 12- and 24-week RBC-TI rates; 8-week HI-E response rate; and safety.
In the 20 studies (n = 3455), patients had a mean age of 73.6 years, and 41.5% were female. Revised International Prognostic Scoring System scores included very low risk (22.49%) and low risk (67.07%). Additionally, 67.39% of patients had RS-positive disease, and 76.41% of patients had prior exposure to an ESA.
What additional efficacy outcomes were reported in the meta-analysis of luspatercept in lower-risk MDS?
Among evaluable patients from 11 studies (n = 1431), the 12-week RBC-TI rate was 57.0% (95% CI, 48.1%-65.5%; I2 = 90%). Notably, data from a meta-regression analysis showed that a history of ESA use was associated with a negative effect on 12-week RBC-TI rates (P < .001). Findings from a subsequent subgroup analysis showed that in 5 studies where more than 90% of patients (n = 1335) had prior ESA exposure, the 12-week RBC-TI rate was 43.1% (95% CI, 34.8%-51.9%; I2 = 89.6%) compared with 58% (95% CI, 49.4%-66.1%; I2 = 67%) in 5 studies where less than 90% of patients (n = 576) had prior ESA exposure (P = .017).
In evaluable patients across 8 studies (n = 1047), the 24-week RBC-TI rate was 35.8% (95% CI, 28.7%-43.6%; I2 = 82.1%), and subgroup analyses showed varying response rates based on patient characteristics (P < .001). In 2 studies, patients (n = 212) with ESA-naive, RS-positive disease achieved a 24-week RBC-TI rate of 49.1% (95% CI, 42.4%-55.8%; I2 = 0%). Conversely, patients (n = 381) with ESA-exposed, RS-positive disease treated across 3 studies experienced a 24-week RBC-TI rate of 30.5% (95% CI, 25.2%-36.3%; I2 = 25.6%). In 2 studies that included patients (n = 334) with RS-positive disease, irrespective of prior ESA exposure, the 24-week RBC-TI rate was 38.3% (95% CI, 22.6%-57.0%; I2 = 84.4%). In a single study that included patients (n = 120) with ESA-refractory, RS-negative disease, the 24-week RBC-TI rate was 22.9% (95% CI, 16.2%-31.2%).
Regarding HI-E responses, the overall rate was 51.3% (95% CI, 41.3%-61.2%; I2 = 93%) in evaluable patients (n = 1647) treated across 12 studies, with patient characteristics again associated with significant differences in these rates (P < .001). Patients (n = 182) with ESA-naive, RS-positive disease from a single study achieved an HI-E rate of 74.2% (95% CI, 67.4%-80.0%), and patients (n = 659) with ESA-refractory, RS-positive disease treated across 5 studies experienced an HI-E rate of 51.3% (95% CI, 32%-70.2%; I2 = 95%). In 4 studies that included patients (n = 537) with ESA-refractory disease and varying RS status, the HI-E rate was 51.5% (95% CI, 39.5%-63.6%; I2 = 86%). In 3 studies with patients (n = 269) with ESA-refractory, RS-negative disease, this rate was 42.7% (95% CI, 24.9%-62.7%; I2 = 83.8%).
What safety data were reported for luspatercept?
The most common adverse effects (AEs) reported with luspatercept included peripheral edema (3 studies, n = 365; 17.8%; 95% CI, 11.4%-26.8%; I2 = 65.9%), diarrhea (4 studies, n = 473; 15.6%; 95% CI, 8.2%-27.7%; I2 = 85.6%), and back pain (2 studies, n = 335; 16.1%; 95% CI, 9.2%-26.8%; I2 = 76.7%). Serious AEs were reported in 28% of patients (n = 1088) across 5 studies (95% CI, 12.8%-50.7%; I2 = 97.2%) and were generally manageable and not life threatening. Notably, no significant difference in the rate of serious AEs was reported for patients treated in a clinical trial (32.1%; 95% CI, 15.5%-54.8%) vs those treated in real-world cohorts (22.9%; 95% CI, 3.5%-70.6%; P = .691).
“Notably, the frequency of AEs was lower in real-world studies than clinical trials, indicating good tolerability in routine clinical practice,” the study authors wrote. “In contrast, other agents used in lower-risk MDS, such as imetelstat [Rytelo], low-dose azacitidine, and lenalidomide [Revlimid], have been associated with higher rates of hematologic toxicities, particularly thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, which increases the risk of serious infections and can potentially negatively affect long-term treatment adherence.”
Study authors noted that this meta-analysis was limited by factors, including limited access to patient-level data to fully explore the effects of treatment across various subgroups; availability of some data only through abstracts; and inconsistent reporting of some clinical end points beyond the 8-week RBC-TI rate.
References
- Alhajahjeh A, Woite NL, Rolles B, et al. Luspatercept for patients with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes/neoplasms: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Blood Adv. 2025;9(24):6511-6523. doi:10.1182/bloodadvances.2025017611
- US FDA approves Bristol Myers Squibb’s Reblozyl (luspatercept-aamt) as first-line treatment of anemia in adults with lower-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) who may require transfusions. News release. Bristol Myers Squibb. August 28, 2023. Accessed February 19, 2026. https://news.bms.com/news/details/2023/U.S.-FDA-Approves-Bristol-Myers-Squibbs-Reblozyl-luspatercept-aamt-as-First-Line-Treatment-of-Anemia-in-Adults-with-Lower-Risk-Myelodysplastic-Syndromes-MDS-Who-May-Require-Transfusions/default.aspx