Real-world treatment patterns in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Clinical and economic outcomes in patients treated with pomalidomide or daratumumab

2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522199553
Author(s):  
Joshua Richter ◽  
Vamshi Ruthwik Anupindi ◽  
Jason Yeaw ◽  
Suneel Kudaravalli ◽  
Stojan Zavisic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Economic Outcomes ◽  
Office Visits ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Real World Evidence ◽  
New Treatment

Introduction Real-world evidence on later line treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) is sparse. We evaluated clinical outcomes among RRMM patients in the 1-year following treatment with pomalidomide or daratumumab and compared economic outcomes between RRMM patients and non-MM patients. Patient and Methods Adult patients with ≥1 claim of pomalidomide or daratumumab were identified between January 2012 and February 2018 using IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus US claims database. Patients were required to have a diagnosis or treatment for MM and a claim of any immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors before the index date. Mean time to new therapy, overall survival (OS) using Kaplan-Meier curve and adverse events (AEs) were reported over the 1-year post-index period. RRMM patients were also matched to a non-MM comparator cohort and economic outcomes were compared between the two cohorts. Results 289 RRMM patients were matched to 1,445 patients without MM. Most prevalent hematological AE was anemia (72.0%) and non-hematological AE was infections (75.4%). Mean (SD) time to a new treatment was 4.7 (5.3) months and median OS was 14.6 months. RRMM patients had significantly higher hospitalizations and physician office visits (Both P < .0001) compared to non-MM patients. Adjusting for baseline characteristics, patients with RRMM had 4.9 times (95% CI 3.8-6.4, P < .0001) the total healthcare costs compared with patients without MM. The major driver of total costs among RRMM patients was pharmacy costs (67.3%). Conclusion RRMM patients showed a high frequency of AEs, low OS, and a substantial economic burden suggesting need for effective treatment options.

scholarly journals Real-world comparative effectiveness of triplets containing bortezomib (B), carfilzomib (C), daratumumab (D), or ixazomib (I) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the US

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Faith Davies ◽  
Robert Rifkin ◽  
Caitlin Costello ◽  
Gareth Morgan ◽  
Saad Usmani ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
The Us ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard Models ◽  
Comparative Effectiveness Analysis ◽  
Line Of Therapy

AbstractMultiple available combinations of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators (IMIDs), and monoclonal antibodies are shifting the relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treatment landscape. Lack of head-to-head trials of triplet regimens highlights the need for real-world (RW) evidence. We conducted an RW comparative effectiveness analysis of bortezomib (V), carfilzomib (K), ixazomib (I), and daratumumab (D) combined with either lenalidomide or pomalidomide plus dexamethasone (Rd or Pd) in RRMM. A retrospective cohort of patients initiating triplet regimens in line of therapy (LOT) ≥ 2 on/after 1/1/2014 was followed between 1/2007 and 3/2018 in Optum’s deidentified US electronic health records database. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods; regimens were compared using covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. Seven hundred forty-one patients (820 patient LOTs) with an Rd backbone (VRd, n = 349; KRd, n = 218; DRd, n = 99; IRd, n = 154) and 348 patients (392 patient LOTs) with a Pd backbone (VPd, n = 52; KPd, n = 146; DPd, n = 149; IPd, n = 45) in LOTs ≥2 were identified. More patients ≥75 years received IRd (39.6%), IPd (37.8%), and VRd (36.7%) than other triplets. More patients receiving VRd/VPd were in LOT2 vs other triplets. Unadjusted median TTNT in LOT ≥ 2: VRd, 13.9; KRd, 8.7; IRd, 11.4; DRd, not estimable (NE); and VPd, 12.0; KPd, 6.7; IPd, 9.5 months; DPd, NE. In covariate-adjusted analysis, only KRd vs DRd was associated with a significantly higher risk of next LOT initiation/death (HR 1.72; P = 0.0142); no Pd triplet was significantly different vs DPd in LOT ≥ 2. Our data highlight important efficacy/effectiveness gaps between results observed in phase 3 clinical trials and those realized in the RW.

scholarly journals Novel Non-Immunologic Agents for Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Review Article

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (20) ◽  
pp. 5210
Author(s):  
Arthur Bobin ◽  
Cécile Gruchet ◽  
Stéphanie Guidez ◽  
Hélène Gardeney ◽  
Laly Nsiala Makunza ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Hdac Inhibitors ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Curative Therapy ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Novel Treatments ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
Drug Classes

Novel treatments are needed to address the lack of options for patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. Even though immunotherapy-based treatments have revolutionized the field in recent years, offering new opportunities for patients, there is still no curative therapy. Thus, non-immunologic agents, which have proven effective for decades, are still central to the treatment of multiple myeloma, especially for advanced disease. Building on their efficacy in myeloma, the development of proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs has been pursued, and has led to the emergence of a novel generation of agents (e.g., carfilzomib, ixazomib, pomalidomide). The use of alkylating agents is decreasing in most treatment regimens, but melflufen, a peptide-conjugated alkylator with a completely new mechanism of action, offers interesting opportunities. Moreover, with the identification of novel targets, new drug classes have entered the myeloma armamentarium, such as XPO1 inhibitors (selinexor), HDAC inhibitors (panobinostat), and anti-BCL-2 agents (venetoclax). New pathways are still being explored, especially the possibility of a mutation-driven strategy, as biomarkers and targeted treatments are increasing. Though multiple myeloma is still considered incurable, the treatment options are expanding and are progressively becoming more diverse, largely because of the continuous development of non-immunologic agents.

scholarly journals How I treat relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (s1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hans C. Lee ◽  
Claudio Cerchione
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Nuclear Export ◽  
Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors ◽  
Alkylating Agents ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Unmet Need ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Antibody Drug Conjugate ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Therapeutic Landscape

The expanding therapeutic landscape of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has contributed to significant improvements in patient outcomes. These have included combinations of proteasome inhibitors (PIs), immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs), monoclonal antibodies (mAbs), histone deacetylase inhibitors, and/or alkylating agents. More recently, the approval of the first-in-class nuclear export inhibitor selinexor and the first-in-class B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) belantamab mafodotin has helped address the current unmet need in patients refractory to PI, IMiD, and anti-CD38 mAb directed therapy, otherwise known as triple class refractory myeloma. With the growing number of treatment options in the RRMM therapeutic landscape, the choice and sequencing of drugs and combinations has become increasingly complex. In this review we discuss our approach and considerations in the treatment of both early and late RRRM based on best available data and our clinical experience.

scholarly journals KarMMa-RW: comparison of idecabtagene vicleucel with real-world outcomes in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Yi Lin ◽  
Hartmut Goldschmidt ◽  
Donna Reece ◽  
Ajay Nooka ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
T Cell Therapy ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Single Data ◽  
Line Of Therapy

AbstractPatients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) who are triple-class exposed (to an immunomodulatory agent, proteasome inhibitor, and anti-CD38 antibody) have limited treatment options and there is no standard of care. Idecabtagene vicleucel (ide-cel, bb2121), a BCMA-directed CAR T-cell therapy, demonstrated efficacy in triple-class exposed RRMM patients in the KarMMa trial (NCT03361748). In this retrospective study (KarMMa-RW), patient-level data from triple-class exposed RRMM patients were merged into a single data model and compared with KarMMa using trimmed stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting. Endpoints included overall response rate (ORR; primary), rate of very good partial response or better (≥VGPR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Of 1949 real-world triple-class exposed RRMM patients, 190 received subsequent (index) line of therapy and met KarMMa eligibility criteria (Eligible RRMM cohort). With a median follow-up of 13.3 months in KarMMa and 10.2 months in Eligible RRMM, ORR, and ≥VGPR were significantly improved in KarMMa versus Eligible RRMM (ORR, 76.4% vs 32.2%; ≥VGPR, 57.9% vs 13.7%; both P < 0.0001) as were PFS (11.6 vs 3.5 months; P = 0.0004) and OS (20.2 vs 14.7 months; P = 0.0006). This study demonstrated that ide-cel significantly improved responses and survival compared with currently available therapies in triple-class exposed RRMM.

scholarly journals Renal response in real-world carfilzomib- vs bortezomib-treated patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

2021 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 367-376
Author(s):  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
Alan Fu ◽  
Ruben Niesvizky ◽  
Sundar Jagannath ◽  
Ralph Boccia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Positive Association ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Renal Response ◽  
Refractory Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazard Models ◽  
Rate Ratios

Abstract In the phase 3 ENDEAVOR study, carfilzomib-dexamethasone (Kd) improved survival over bortezomib-dexamethasone (Vd) in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), regardless of baseline renal function. This real-world study compared renal response in patients with RRMM (1-3 prior lines) and renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤50 mL/min) treated with Kd vs Vd. Electronic medical records data from the Oncology Services Comprehensive Electronic Records database were assessed (from January 2012 through February 2018). Time to renal response (defined according to International Myeloma Working Group criteria) was evaluated using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for renal overall response (ROR) and renal complete response (RCR) using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for baseline covariates. Included were 543 Kd-treated and 1005 Vd-treated patients. In line 2 (2L), compared with Vd, Kd achieved significantly higher ROR (51.4% vs 39.6%; P &lt; .0001) and RCR (26.6% vs 22.2%; P = .0229). After baseline covariate adjustment, 2L patients receiving Kd vs Vd were 45% more likely to achieve ROR (IRR, 1.45; 95% CI, 1.18-1.78), and 68% were more likely to achieve RCR (IRR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.24-2.28). The renal response benefit with Kd remained consistent in 2L to line 4 (4L). In a combined analysis of patients receiving Kd and Vd (2L and 2L-4L), renal responders had longer overall survival and time to next treatment than renal nonresponders. These results demonstrate improved real-world effectiveness of Kd over Vd in RRMM renal rescue, and the positive association between renal response and improved survival.

scholarly journals Emerging options in multiple myeloma: targeted, immune, and epigenetic therapies

Hematology ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 518-524 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaji Kumar
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Clonal Evolution ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Current Treatment ◽  
T Cell Therapy ◽  
Treatment Approaches ◽  
Development Of Resistance ◽  
Immune Therapies ◽  
New Treatment

AbstractConsiderable progress has been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma in the past decade with median survival for the disease improving significantly. This has come through a combination of better understanding of the disease biology and coordinated research into new treatment approaches including better supportive care. However, patients eventually become refractory to available treatments and succumb to the disease, highlighting the need to develop new treatment approaches. The genetic heterogeneity in the disease and clonal evolution under treatment pressure underlie the development of resistance, underscoring the need to develop more effective therapies that can eradicate the disease at initial treatment as well as the need for new classes of drugs with varying mechanisms of action. To this end, there has been intense focus on exploring novel approaches to therapy including small-molecule inhibitors targeting specific abnormalities, immune therapies including monoclonal antibodies and adaptive T-cell therapy, as well as epigenetic approaches. Although many of these drugs are in the early stages of clinical development, the early data appear to be very promising. Many of these drugs can be safely and effectively combined with the current treatment classes such as proteasome inhibitors and immunomodulatory drugs, further enhancing the treatment options for myeloma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document