Skip to main content

A 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 Myelodysplastic Syndromes (MDS) Participants Who Require Red Blood Cell Transfusions and Are ESA Naïve

Active, not recruiting · Phase 3 · NCT03682536

Conditions: Myelodysplastic Syndromes

At a glance

Research payments reported, 2025
$81,137
U.S. investigators named
8
Sites paid
7
Planned or actual enrollment
363

About the trial

Sponsor
Celgene (with Acceleron Pharma, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Rahway, NJ USA)
Tested
Luspatercept (drug), Epoetin alfa (drug)
Dates
Started 2019-01-02; completion 2027-09-28
Results posted
Yes

The purpose of this study is to determine the effectiveness of luspatercept (ACE-536) compared to epoetin alfa on red blood cell (RBC) transfusion independence (for at least 12 weeks) with a concurrent hemoglobin increase of at least 1.5 g/dL in participants with anemia due to revised international prognostic scoring system (IPSS-R) very low, low, or intermediate risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) who require RBC transfusions and have never been exposed to erythropoiesis stimulating agent (ESA).

From ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-11-20. Full record, eligibility and contacts (opens in a new tab)

Industry funding

E.r. Squibb & Sons, L.l.c. reported $81,137 in research payments for this study in 2025 (8 payments).

Products named: Reblozyl

Research payments usually go to hospitals, universities and research sites to run a study, not to the investigators personally. A payment is not evidence of wrongdoing.

U.S. investigators named on this study

Clinicians the company named as principal investigators in its Open Payments reports.

Sites paid to run it

Sources: CMS Open Payments research payments (program year 2025) and ClinicalTrials.gov, U.S. National Library of Medicine.