Skip to main content

New Drug Approvals 2011 - Pt. XXIX (ruxolitinib phosphate) (Jakafi ™)








ATC Code: L01XE18
Wikipedia:Ruxolitinib

On November 16th 2011, the FDA approved ruxolitinib phosphate (Tradename:Jakafi™ Research Code: INCB-018424), a JAK1/JAK2 inhibitor for the treatment of patients with intermediate or high-risk myelofibrosis, including primary myelofibrosis, post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis and post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis.

Myelofibrosis is a disorder of the bone marrow, in which the marrow is replaced by scar (fibrous) tissue. Scarring of the bone marrow reduces its ability to blood cells, and can lead to anemia, bleeding problems, and a higher risk of infections due to reduced white blood cells. It is also associated with engorgement of organs suchs as the spleen and liver. Primary myelofibrosis may develop to secondary myelofibrosis - including leukemia and lymphoma. Myelofibrosis is associated with dysregulated Janus kinases JAK1 and JAK2, and some with a somatic mutation in JAK2 (JAK2V617F) (OMIM). JAK signaling involves recruitment of STATs (signal transducers and activators of transcription) to cytokine receptors, activation and subsequent localization of STATs to the nucleus leading to modulation of gene expression. Oral administration of ruxolitinib prevented splenomegaly, preferentially decreased JAK2V617F mutant cells in the spleen and decreased circulating inflammatory cytokines.

JAK1 (Uniprot:P23458) and JAK2 (Uniprot:O60674) are tyrosine protein kinases and members of the Janus kinase subfamily, where all members of the family contain two tandem protein kinase domains (PFAM:PF00069), one of which is catalytically active and one believed to be inactive. JAK1 and JAK2 are 43% identical by sequence and both have the 3D structure of their kinase domain determined (see e.g. PDBe:3EYH and PDBe:3Q32 for JAK1 and JAK2 respectively). Ruxolitinib is the first approved targeted JAK inhibitor, with several others in mid to late-stage clinical development (including CYT-387, GLPG-0634, INCB-28050, ONX-0803, NS-018, pacritinib (SB-1518), AZD-1480, BMS-911543, LS-104, XL-019, TG-101348, tofacitinib (CP-690550), VX-509, R-348, WHI-P131 and oclacitinib (PF-03394197) (veterinary applications)) - note these show a broad range of selectivity against the three known JAK subtypes.
Ruxolitinib (IUPAC: (R)-3-(4-(7H-pyrrolo[2,3­ d]pyrimidin-4-yl)-1H-pyrazol-1-yl)-3-cyclopentylpropanenitrile phosphate; (Standard InCHI key: HFNKQEVNSGCOJV-OAHLLOKOSA-N) has a molecular weight of 404.36, an AlogP of 2.88 and complies with all components of Lipinski's rule of 5.

Ruxolitinib is administered orally as the phosphate salt as tablets and dosed according to platelet count (hence the large range of dosage forms). Each tablet contains ruxolitinib phosphate equivalent to 5 mg, 10 mg, 15 mg, 20 mg and 25 mg of ruxolitinib free base. The Tmax for Ruxolitinib is 1-2 hours post dosing, with exposure (Cmax and AUC) linear over a dose range of 5mg to 200mg. Oral absorption is in excess of 95%. The volume of distribution is 53-65 L, with plasma protein binding in excess of 97%. Ruxolitinib is predominantly metabolized by CYP3A4, with the two primary metabolites displaying weaker, but still significant pharmacological activity against their specific targets. Administration of ruxolitinib with ketoconazole, a potent CYP3A4 inhibitor, prolongs the half life of ruxolitinib from 3.7 to 6.0 hours, increases the Cmax to 33% and the AUC to 91%. The change in the pharmacodynamic marker, pSTAT3 inhibition, was consistent with the corresponding ruxolitinib AUC following concurrent administration with ketoconazole.

The license holder for Jakafi is Incyte, and the full prescribing information can be found here.

Comments

Unknown said…
Thanks for the post it prompted me to do some ChemSpider curation and deposition. However, as I looked at the post and the data, there is some confusion about Ruxolitinib and Jakafi. While they are related they are not exactly the same, but in the post this is not always clear.

Ruxolitinib:
http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.24750936.html

Jafaki:
http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.26286919.html
Unknown said…
Actually, as soon as I posted that last comment I realised that there is another serious error in the post, and as a result in the ChemSpider links that I posted. The image that is in the post is the correct enantiomer (R), however the ChEMBL article and standard InChIkey are for the S-enantiomer.

The correct ChemSpider links are,

Ruxolitinib:
http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.25027389.html

Jakafi:
http://www.chemspider.com/Chemical-Structure.26286920.html
jpo said…
Hi, Thanks Dave. You are right.

The post failed to discriminate between the dosed salt (ruxolitinib phosphate) and the active compound form (ruxolitinib). I've reworded this.

More interesting though is that the original ChEMBL structure came from the paperhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=MiamiImageURL&_cid=271398&_user=776054&_pii=S0960894X10014770&_check=y&_origin=&_coverDate=15-Dec-2010&view=c&wchp=dGLbVlt-zSkzk&md5=f0b47b7a41bbbfcea9c233b718ea7531/1-s2.0-S0960894X10014770-main.pdf and the structure is correct as drawn in the primary literature, since this is the only version currently in ChEMBL, the wrong enantiomer was tagged. So it is an example of an error in the literature being propagated. It's quite interesting, that the paper itself is about a different series, and the Incyte compound is listed as prior art, and we know from some error benchmarking in ChEMBL, that chemists drawing someone else's compound is a common source of errors.

So we'll fix this, and many thanks. Community curation at it's best!

Popular posts from this blog

Improvements in SureChEMBL's chemistry search and adoption of RDKit

    Dear SureChEMBL users, If you frequently rely on our "chemistry search" feature, today brings great news! We’ve recently implemented a major update that makes your search experience faster than ever. What's New? Last week, we upgraded our structure search engine by aligning it with the core code base used in ChEMBL . This update allows SureChEMBL to leverage our FPSim2 Python package , returning results in approximately one second. The similarity search relies on 256-bit RDKit -calculated ECFP4 fingerprints, and a single instance requires approximately 1 GB of RAM to run. SureChEMBL’s FPSim2 file is not currently available for download, but we are considering generating it periodicaly and have created it once for you to try in Google Colab ! For substructure searches, we now also use an RDKit -based solution via SubstructLibrary , which returns results several times faster than our previous implementation. Additionally, structure search results are now sorted by

Improved querying for SureChEMBL

    Dear SureChEMBL users, Earlier this year we ran a survey to identify what you, the users, would like to see next in SureChEMBL. Thank you for offering your feedback! This gave us the opportunity to have some interesting discussions both internally and externally. While we can't publicly reveal precisely our plans for the coming months (everything will be delivered at the right time), we can at least say that improving the compound structure extraction quality is a priority. Unfortunately, the change won't happen overnight as reprocessing 167 millions patents takes a while. However, the good news is that the new generation of optical chemical structure recognition shows good performance, even for patent images! We hope we can share our results with you soon. So in the meantime, what are we doing? You may have noticed a few changes on the SureChEMBL main page. No more "Beta" flag since we consider the system to be stable enough (it does not mean that you will never

ChEMBL brings drug bioactivity data to the Protein Data Bank in Europe

In the quest to develop new drugs, understanding the 3D structure of molecules is crucial. Resources like the Protein Data Bank in Europe (PDBe) and the Cambridge Structural Database (CSD) provide these 3D blueprints for many biological molecules. However, researchers also need to know how these molecules interact with their biological target – their bioactivity. ChEMBL is a treasure trove of bioactivity data for countless drug-like molecules. It tells us how strongly a molecule binds to a target, how it affects a biological process, and even how it might be metabolized. But here's the catch: while ChEMBL provides extensive information on a molecule's activity and cross references to other data sources, it doesn't always tell us if a 3D structure is available for a specific drug-target complex. This can be a roadblock for researchers who need that structural information to design effective drugs. Therefore, connecting ChEMBL data with resources like PDBe and CSD is essen

ChEMBL 34 is out!

We are delighted to announce the release of ChEMBL 34, which includes a full update to drug and clinical candidate drug data. This version of the database, prepared on 28/03/2024 contains:         2,431,025 compounds (of which 2,409,270 have mol files)         3,106,257 compound records (non-unique compounds)         20,772,701 activities         1,644,390 assays         15,598 targets         89,892 documents Data can be downloaded from the ChEMBL FTP site:  https://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/chembl/ChEMBLdb/releases/chembl_34/ Please see ChEMBL_34 release notes for full details of all changes in this release:  https://ftp.ebi.ac.uk/pub/databases/chembl/ChEMBLdb/releases/chembl_34/chembl_34_release_notes.txt New Data Sources European Medicines Agency (src_id = 66): European Medicines Agency's data correspond to EMA drugs prior to 20 January 2023 (excluding vaccines). 71 out of the 882 newly added EMA drugs are only authorised by EMA, rather than from other regulatory bodies e.g.

A python client for accessing ChEMBL web services

Motivation The CheMBL Web Services provide simple reliable programmatic access to the data stored in ChEMBL database. RESTful API approaches are quite easy to master in most languages but still require writing a few lines of code. Additionally, it can be a challenging task to write a nontrivial application using REST without any examples. These factors were the motivation for us to write a small client library for accessing web services from Python. Why Python? We choose this language because Python has become extremely popular (and still growing in use) in scientific applications; there are several Open Source chemical toolkits available in this language, and so the wealth of ChEMBL resources and functionality of those toolkits can be easily combined. Moreover, Python is a very web-friendly language and we wanted to show how easy complex resource acquisition can be expressed in Python. Reinventing the wheel? There are already some libraries providing access to ChEMBL d