scholarly journals Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Patients with Functional High-Risk (Early Relapse) Multiple Myeloma

2021 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. S107-S108
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Belli ◽  
Eric Hansen ◽  
Ankit Kansagra ◽  
Keshava Dilwali ◽  
Ching-Kun Wang
Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
Andrew J. Belli ◽  
Eric Hansen ◽  
Ankit Kansagra ◽  
Keshava Dilwali ◽  
Ching-Kun Wang

Background: There have been significant advancements in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM) over the last 20 years including an influx of recently approved novel therapies. However, with these advances in treatment, the optimal combination and sequence of agents remain largely unknown especially in relapsed/refractory MM. A major unmet need in MM is patients with high-risk disease. Revised International Staging System is used to identify patients with high-risk MM, however a better definition of high risk includes "functional high risk" (i.e. patients relapsing within 18 months from diagnosis). As it has been previously shown that clinical trial populations are not universally representative of those in the routine practice setting, real-world data (RWD) can provide valuable insight into this rapidly evolving treatment landscape and high-risk population. Here we explore treatment patterns and outcomes of functional high-risk MM, patients who relapse within 18 months of initial diagnosis. Methods: This retrospective study utilized the COTA real-world database, a de-identified database of RWD derived from the electronic health records of partnered healthcare providers in the United States. A total of 958 patients were identified as having been diagnosed with active MM between Jan. 1, 2015 and Jan. 1, 2020 and experienced early relapse (defined as relapse within 18 months of initial active MM diagnosis and treatment). Practice setting distribution of this cohort was 84% academic and 16% community. Line of therapy was assigned programmatically utilizing IMWG definitions and guidelines. Patient characteristics and treatment patterns across the first (1L) and second lines (2L) of treatment were assessed using descriptive statistics. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was calculated overall and within treatment subgroups of interest as a surrogate for progression-free survival. Results: Among this functional high-risk patient population, the mean age was 64 yrs. (SD ±11.3) and the patients were predominantly white (72.6%). The most common cytogenetic abnormalities at diagnosis were del(13) (46.0% positive), 1q (36.4%), and t(11;14) (25.4%). In 1L, the majority of patients received a triplet regimen (75.4%), most commonly proteosome inhibitor (PI) + immunomodulator (IMiD) + steroids (45.0%). A total of 56 patients (5.9%) received stem-cell transplant (SCT) in 1L. Overall, 16.3% of the population did not receive 2L therapy due to death. Among the patients who received 2L therapy after early relapse (N=869), 50.5% received an SCT. TTNT was significantly longer for patients receiving SCT in 2L as compared to those who did not (34.8 vs. 5.8 months, respectively). Among patients who did not receive SCT (N=430), triplet therapy was most common (61.2%) with PI + IMiD + steroids representing the largest regimen group (30.2%). Table 1 shows the distribution of PI drugs within the 2L PI + IMID + steroids group and their associated median TTNT. No significant differences were observed when comparing median TTNT of 2L PI + IMID + steroids to daratumumab-based regimens (5.3 vs. 5.6 months, respectively). Conclusions: In our real-world population, median TTNT for functional high-risk patients was 17.8 months. 50.5% of these functional high-risk patients received SCT in 2L with the most common induction regimen containing cyclophosphamide + etoposide + dexamethasone (CED). For patients not receiving SCT in 2L, the most common regimen type included PI + IMID + Steroids. In comparing antibody-based therapy vs. PI + IMID + dexamethasone-based therapy, daratumumab-based combinations showed no significant difference in unadjusted analysis. Our study highlights some very important observations in functional high-risk patients. First, if patients are SCT eligible and it is not performed as part of first line treatment, SCT still provides the best outcomes in regard to TTNT in the second line setting. For patients not receiving SCT, our RWD demonstrates that 30.2% receive PI + IMID + dexamethasone as 2L treatment with only 13% receiving carfilzomib-based combination. Our study highlights the poor outcome of functional high-risk patients and provides insight into treatment patterns in 2L therapy. Further research is needed to explore patient and disease characteristics of functional high-risk patients and study novel treatment strategies like CAR T cell therapy or T-cell engagers in these patient population. Disclosures Belli: COTA, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Hansen:COTA, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Kansagra:Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Bristol Myers Squibb /Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Pfizer, Karyopharm Therpeutics: Other: Advisory Board. Dilwali:COTA, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company. Wang:COTA, Inc.: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-12 ◽  
Author(s):  
Huamao Mark Lin ◽  
Keith L. Davis ◽  
James A. Kaye ◽  
Katarina Luptakova ◽  
Saurabh P. Nagar ◽  
...  

Background. Limited data are available from real-world practices in Europe describing prevailing treatment patterns and outcomes in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), particularly by cytogenetic risk. Methods. A retrospective medical record review was conducted in 200 RRMM patients in France. From first relapse, patients were assessed on second-/third-line treatments, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and healthcare utilization. Results. Fifty-five high risk and 113 standard risk patients were identified. Overall, 192 patients (96%) received second-line therapy after relapse. Lenalidomide-based regimens were most common (>50%) in second line. Hospitalization incidence in high risk patients was approximately twice that of standard risk patients. From Kaplan-Meier estimation, median (95% CI) second-line PFS was 21.4 (17.5, 25.0) months (by high versus standard risk: 10.6 [6.4, 17.0] versus 28.7 [22.1, 37.3] months). Among second-line recipients, 47.4% were deceased at data collection. Median second-line OS was 59.4 (38.8, NE) months (by high versus standard risk: 36.5 [17.4, 50.6] versus 73.6 [66.5, NE] months). Conclusions. The prognostic importance of cytogenetic risk in RRMM was apparent, whereby high (versus standard) risk patients had decidedly shorter PFS and OS. Frequent hospitalizations indicated potentially high costs associated with RRMM, particularly for high risk patients. These findings may inform economic evaluations of RRMM therapies.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18727-e18727
Author(s):  
Robert Smith ◽  
Mei Xue ◽  
Natalie Dorrow ◽  
Prateesh Varughese ◽  
Cosima Hogea ◽  
...  

e18727 Background: Treatment for multiple myeloma (MM) over the past decade has significantly improved survival. In particular, 3 drug classes have altered the treatment paradigm for MM patients: proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), and CD38 monoclonal antibodies (anti-CD38s). Despite these advances, the majority of patients with MM will become refractory to PIs, IMiDs, and anti-CD38s, and limited evidence indicates these patients have poor outcomes. A retrospective study in the US showed that 275 patients treated at 14 academic institutions with prior exposure to a PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 had median overall survival of 9.2 months. The aim of this study was to evaluate real-world treatment patterns and outcomes (duration of therapy and overall survival) of patients who had been treated with a PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 in community practices in the US. Methods: This retrospective observational study was conducted using the Integra Connect (IC) database. The IC database includes electronic health data from structured and unstructured fields from 12 community practices on the East and West Coast of the US. Adult patients with ≥2 ICD-9/ICD-10 codes for MM on at least 2 separate dates, who received MM treatment between Jan 1, 2016, and Dec 31, 2019, with treatment history that included at least one PI, one IMiD, and one anti-CD38 (triple exposed), and initiated a subsequent line of therapy (s-LOT) after becoming triple exposed, were included. Duration of length of s-LOT was defined as number of days from start of s-LOT to last-day supply of s-LOT. Overall survival was defined as the length of time from start of s-LOT through death or the date of the last office visit. Results: A total of 501 patients were included in this analysis. The median age of patients was 64.9 years; 50% were male; 50% had commercial insurance. 82.8% of patients had ECOG 0 or 1 at diagnosis and had received a median of 3 prior lines of therapy (LOTs) before initiating s-LOT. Prior to initiating s-LOT, 91% had been exposed to bortezomib, 81% to carfilzomib, 94% to lenalidomide, 82% to pomalidomide, and 100% to daratumumab. In s-LOT, 95% received treatment that included same drug or same drug class (30% received bortezomib, 48% carfilzomib, 31% lenalidomide, 47% pomalidomide, and 31% daratumumab). The median duration of s-LOT was 78 days and median survival was 10.3 months (308 days) from initiation of s-LOT. Conclusions: For triple-class exposed patients, there is a lack of consensus on the most efficacious approach to subsequent treatment. The present study shows a significant amount of retreatment with previously used agents or classes among these patients with short duration of therapy and poor survival. As has been previously noted, new strategies and agents targeting novel aspects of MM are needed to improve outcomes for these patients. Disclosures: This study (213286) was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
Parameswaran Hari ◽  
Lita Araujo ◽  
Dominick Latremouille-Viau ◽  
Peggy Lin ◽  
Mikhail Davidson ◽  
...  

Background: Renal impairment (RI) is associated with substantial clinical and economic burden in patients with multiple myeloma (MM), but real-world data reporting on healthcare resource utilization (HRU) and outcomes in these patients are lacking. We assessed treatment patterns, overall survival (OS), HRU and associated costs across lines of therapy (LoT) in patients with MM who had baseline RI. Methods: We identified patients (aged ≥18 years) with continuous Part A, B and D coverage who initiated pharmacologic therapy for MM between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2016. Baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment patterns from first-line to fourth-line (1L-4L) were reported for all eligible patients (main cohort). Within this cohort, a subgroup of patients diagnosed with RI at baseline (RI subgroup) were identified using appropriate International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 and ICD-10 codes. Treatment regimens were identified during the first 60 days following start of each LoT; stem cell transplantation (SCT) in 1L was considered part of the 1L regimen. The end of each LoT was indicated by treatment augmentation, treatment switching (after >60 days), discontinuation of all agents (for >90 days), or death. Overall survival (Kaplan-Meier analysis) was defined as time from start of each LoT until death or censoring (end of data/Medicare coverage). All-cause HRU categories were identified during each LoT and reported as incidence rate per patient per month (PPPM); associated all-cause healthcare costs during LoT were reported in 2017 US$. Results are presented using standard descriptive statistics. Results: A main cohort of 10,026 patients was identified; of these, a RI subgroup of 714 patients with baseline RI was identified (7.1% of main cohort). At 1L initiation, the RI subgroup was generally younger (71.9 vs. 74.6 years), had a lower proportion of females (47.8% vs. 53.1%) and had a higher proportion of Medicare coverage for end-stage renal disease (62.9% vs. 6.3%) than the main cohort. Patients with RI had a higher mean Charlson Comorbidity Index score (excluding MM; 4.8 vs. 3.3) and a higher proportion of patients with comorbidities (anemia: 72.5% vs. 57.9%; diabetes with chronic complications: 38.7% vs. 27.1%; cardiovascular diseases: 97.2% vs. 82.5%) than the main cohort. In the RI subgroup, among patients who received SCT in 1L (n=76), bortezomib-dexamethasone (Vd) was the most frequent 1L regimen (39.5%), followed by bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRd; 17.1%) and bortezomib-cyclophosphamide-dexamethasone (VCd; 15.8%). In patients who had no SCT in 1L, Vd was the most frequent 1L regimen (59.5%), followed by VCd (12.7%) and lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd; 12.1%). Among patients in the RI subgroup who progressed to 2L therapy, 61.7% received lenalidomide-based regimens in 1L. Newer MM therapies such as carfilzomib, pomalidomide, ixazomib, daratumumab, and elotuzumab were used more frequently in later LoTs (2L: 25.6%; 3L: 50.0%; 4L: 68.8%). Median OS from start of 1L was shorter in the RI subgroup than in the main cohort (29.9 vs. 46.5 months; Table), and this difference was consistent across each subsequent LoT. Incidence of HRU during 1L (Table) was generally higher in the RI subgroup than the main cohort, particularly for inpatient days (1.3 vs. 0.7 PPPM) and home health services (0.9 vs. 0.5 PPPM); this pattern was consistent between cohorts across each subsequent LoT. Total costs in the 1L RI subgroup vs. main cohort (Table) were $14,782 vs. $12,451; the cost differential was maintained across each subsequent LoT. The key driver of this difference was the additional medical service costs ($12,047 vs. $7,459 in 1L) incurred by patients with RI. Conclusion: Patients with MM who had baseline RI were shown to experience higher clinical and economic burden in real-world clinical practice than the overall MM population. This burden was maintained across LoTs. Efficacious regimens that help improve renal function with minimal toxicity would enable patients with MM and RI to persist with treatment and may help address unmet need in this subgroup of patients. Table Disclosures Hari: BMS: Consultancy; GSK: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy. Araujo:Sanofi Genzyme: Current Employment. Latremouille-Viau:Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Other: Dominique Latremouille-Viau is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which received consultancy fees from Sanofi Genzyme.; Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation: Consultancy, Other: Dominique Latremouille-Viau is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which received consultancy fees from Novartis.. Lin:Sanofi Genzyme: Current Employment. Davidson:Sanofi Genzyme: Other: Mikhail Davidson is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc which received consultancy fees from Sanofi Genzyme.. Guerin:Sanofi Genzyme: Consultancy, Other: Annie Guerin is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which received consultancy fees from Sanofi Genzyme.; Abbvie: Consultancy, Other; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Other: Annie Guerin is an employee of Analysis Group, Inc. which received consultancy fees from Novartis.. Sasane:Sanofi Genzyme: Current Employment.


Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
David Böckle ◽  
Paula Tabares Gaviria ◽  
Xiang Zhou ◽  
Janin Messerschmidt ◽  
Lukas Scheller ◽  
...  

Background: Minimal residual disease (MRD) diagnostics in multiple myeloma (MM) are gaining increasing importance to determine response depth beyond complete remission (CR) since novel agents have shown to induce high rates of deep clinical responses. Moreover, recent reports indicated combining functional imaging with next generation flow cytometry (NGF) could be beneficial in predicting clinical outcome. This applies in particular to the subset of patients suffering from relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who tend to show a higher incidence of residual focal lesions despite serological response. Here, we report our institutions experience with implementing both functional imaging and NGF-guided MRD diagnostics in clinical practice. Methods: Our study included patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) and RRMM achieving VGPR, CR or sCR. Bone marrow aspirates were obtained for MRD-testing according to IMWG 2016 criteria. Samples were collected between July 2019 and July 2020 and analyzed with NGF (according to EuroFlowTM guidelines) at a sensitivity level of 10-5. Results were compared to functional imaging obtained with positron emission tomography (PET) and diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging (DW-MRI). High-risk disease was defined as presence of deletion 17p, translocation (14;16) or (4;14). Results: We included 66 patients with NDMM (n=39) and RRMM (n=27) who achieved VGPR or better. In patients with RRMM the median number of treatment lines was 2 (range 2-11). Fifteen patients suffered from high-risk disease. Median age at NGF diagnostics was 64 years (range 31-83). Among patients achieving VGPR (n=27), CR (n=10) and sCR (n=29) seventeen (26%) were MRD-negative by NGF testing. CR or better was significantly associated NGF MRD-negativity (p=0.04). Notably, rates of NGF MRD-negativity were similar among patients with NDMM (28%) and RRMM (26%). Even some heavily pretreated patients who underwent ≥ 4 lines of therapy achieved MRD-negativity on NGF (2 of 9). Functional imaging was performed in 46 (70%) patients with DW-MRI (n=22) and PET (n=26). Median time between NGF and imaging assessment was 2 days (range 0-147). Combining results from imaging and NGF, 12 out of 46 (26%) patients were MRD-negative with both methods (neg/neg). Three patients displayed disease activity as measured with both, imaging and NGF (pos/pos). Twenty-nine of the remaining patients were MRD-positive only according to NGF (pos/neg), while two patients were positive on imaging only (neg/pos). More patients demonstrated combined MRD-negativity on NGF and imaging (neg/neg) in the NDMM setting than in RRMM (32% versus 19%). We also observed that 30% of the patients with high-risk genetics showed MRD-negativity on both imaging and NGF. Of note, none of the patients with very advanced disease (≥4 previous lines) was MRD-negative on both techniques. Conclusion In the clinical routine, MRD diagnostics could be used to tailor maintenance and consolidation approaches for patients achieving deep responses by traditional IMWG criteria. Our real-world experience highlights that MRD-negativity can be achieved in patients suffering from high-risk disease and also in late treatment lines, supporting its value as endpoint for clinical trials. However, our data also support MRD diagnostics to be combined with functional imaging at least in the RRMM setting to rule out residual focal lesions. Future studies using MRD for clinical decision-making are highly warranted. Disclosures Einsele: Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Rasche:Celgene/BMS: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria; Skyline Dx: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Sanofi: Honoraria.


2019 ◽  
Vol 28 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Luís Antunes ◽  
Francisco Rocha‐Gonçalves ◽  
Sérgio Chacim ◽  
Cinira Lefèvre ◽  
Marta Pereira ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document