Healthcare Resource Utilization Trends over Time with Continuous Lenalidomide Treatment (Tx) in Patients (Pts) with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM)

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 1326-1326
Author(s):  
Katja Weisel ◽  
Dan T. Vogl ◽  
Michel Delforge ◽  
Kevin Song ◽  
Meletios Dimopoulos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Medical Utilization ◽  
Fixed Duration ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Introduction: Multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable hematologic condition that is associated with high Tx costs. Resource consumption is driven by hospitalization and medical utilization, which is highest during periods of uncontrolled disease, such as after diagnosis and during relapses (De Portu 2013). In the pivotal phase 3 FIRST trial, continuous Tx with lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (Rd) was compared with fixed-duration Rd (Rd18) or fixed-duration combination Tx with melphalan, prednisone, and thalidomide (MPT), each for 18 months (mos), in NDMM pts who were ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Continuous Rd extended progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (interim analysis) vs. MPT. However, it is still unclear whether extending Tx duration with Rd adversely affects healthcare resource utilization. This analysis quantifies the rates of hospitalizations and medical utilization with continuous Rd over time based on data collected in the FIRST trial. Methods: The FIRST trial (N = 1,623) was a pivotal multinational, randomized, open-label study with a median follow up of 37 mos. Non-protocol-driven resource-use data was collected until subjects discontinued study Tx. To assess whether continuous Rd increases healthcare resource utilization over time, the rates of resource utilization for subjects treated with continuous Rd (N = 535) were plotted for up to 48 mos. In addition, hospitalization and medical utilization rates during the Tx period (18 mos) were estimated and compared between the 2 fixed-duration Tx arms. Results: Resource utilization amongst pts treated with continuous Rd declined over time (Figure). The annualized hospitalization rate in the first 3 mos was 3.2 times higher than the average rate for the remaining 45 mos of follow-up (2.02 vs. 0.62), and 4.2 times higher for medical utilization (5.66 vs. 1.34). After 4 years (yrs) of continuous Rd Tx, hospitalization and medical utilization rates were estimated to be 83% and 84% lower than those observed in the first 3 mos of Tx, reflecting the long-term disease control observed with continuous Rd in the FIRST trial. The highest hospitalization rates were associated with infections (0.20 per patient year), cardiovascular disorders (0.06), and respiratory and thoracic disorders (0.05). The mean (standard deviation) length of stay per admission was 14.08 (21.19) days. The highest medical utilization rates were associated with blood transfusions (0.76 interventions per patient year), general imaging procedures (0.21), respiratory and thoracic imaging procedures (0.20), and therapeutic interventions (0.09).The hospitalization rates for the fixed dose Tx arms were 0.91 (Rd18) and 0.79 (MPT) per patient year of follow-up during the Tx period of 18 mos, resulting in a rate ratio (RR) of 1.15 (1.01–1.30). The equivalent rates for medical utilization were 3.00 (Rd18) and 2.86 (MPT) medical interventions per patient year (RR = 1.05 [0.98–1.12]). Conclusions: The rates of resource utilization among pts treated with continuous Rd dropped substantially after the first 3 mos of Tx, and then gradually declined as Tx duration increased. The findings suggest that continuous Tx with Rd does not further increase resource utilization in hospitalizations and medical utilization compared to fixed-duration Tx. A comparison between the 2 fixed arms showed a 15% increase in hospitalization with Rd18 vs. MPT, and no differences in medical utilization between the 2 arms. A limitation of this analysis is that the resources were collected only while pts were receiving their respective Txs. Future analysis should include all costs generated by healthcare resources throughout pts Tx, including Tx-free intervals, and the costs associated with relapses. Figure 1: Hospitalization and medical utilization rates per patient year for patients treated with continuous Rd Figure 1:. Hospitalization and medical utilization rates per patient year for patients treated with continuous Rd Disclosures Weisel: BMS: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria; Noxxon: Consultancy. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Vogl:Amgen: Consultancy; Millennium/Takeda: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Acetylon: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Delforge:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Song:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dimopoulos:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cavenagh:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Hulin:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria. Foá:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Oriol:Janssen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Guo:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy. Monzini:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Van Oostendorp:Celgene: Employment. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene: Employment. Facon:Celgene Corporation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Sickness Absence in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients in Sweden: Trends in a Changing Treatment Landscape

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
Fredrik Borgsten ◽  
Xenia Gatopoulou ◽  
Marta Pisini ◽  
Magnus Tambour ◽  
Frida Schain ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Sickness Absence ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Productivity Loss ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Publicly Traded ◽  
The Third ◽  
The Past ◽  
Over Time

Background In the last decades the introduction of novel drugs has greatly improved the prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM) patients. We have investigated healthcare resource utilization and sickness absence-associated productivity loss over time in a population-wide, retrospective registry study in Sweden. Methods 8,693 patients were identified in the National Cancer Register with a MM diagnosis from July 2001 to December 2015 and followed until 2016. Specialized healthcare usage (inpatient admissions and outpatient visits) were obtained from the Patient Register and costs were estimated by weighted DRG codes. For patients under 66 years of age, sickness absence and salary information were obtained by linkage to the LISA Register. Analyses were performed separately on patients who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) (n=1,425) and on non-transplanted patients (n=7,012) and stratified by diagnosis periods 2001-2005, 2006-2010 and 2011-2015 to reflect increased introduction of effective drugs into clinical care. Median age was 60 years in the ASCT group and 75 years in the non-ASCT group. Results The number of MM patients that underwent ASCT increased over time (n= 282 in 2001-2006 to n= 592 in 2011-2015). MM patients diagnosed most recently had improved overall survival (OS), with five-year OS rate increasing from 52% to 58% to 62% for patients diagnosed in 2001-2005, 2006-2010 and 2011-2015, respectively (p<0.0001). Patients diagnosed during 2011-2015 spent on average 20% and 9% less total time in specialized healthcare than patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 and 2006-2010, respectively (adjusting for sex, age at ASCT, weighted comorbidity score at ASCT and per follow-up year and education at ASCT). This decrease was driven by less usage and time in both inpatient and outpatient care. Adjusted sickness absence time decreased by 41% and 38% in the third follow-up year for patients diagnosed during 2011-2015 compared to patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 and 2006-2010, respectively. Productivity loss costs represented about 45% of total costs (healthcare resource costs ~55%) in the first two follow-up years, but decreased over time. The cumulative median per person cost (healthcare- and productivity-related) over the three follow-up years post-diagnosis decreased by 21% in 2011-2015 (€52,273) compared to 2001-2005 (€66,182), despite an 8% increase in three-year OS over the same period. The number of non-ASCT MM patients also increased over time (n=2,053 in 2001-2005 to n= 2,587 in 2011-2015). Median survival increased from 2.5 years to 3.4 years for patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 compared to 2011-2015. Average total time spent in specialized healthcare was reduced by 29% and 12% for patients diagnosed during 2011-2015, compared to patients diagnosed during 2001-2005 and 2006-2010, respectively (adjusting for sex, age at diagnosis, weighted CCS at diagnosis, weighted CCS per follow-up year and education at diagnosis). This was associated with decreased need for inpatient care and a shift towards more outpatient usage. By the third follow-up year, the adjusted sickness absence time in patients diagnosed during 2011-2015 was reduced by 44% and 23% compared to patients diagnosed in 2001-2005 and 2006-2010, respectively. Productivity loss accounted for approximately 15% of total costs (healthcare resource costs ~85%) and was stable over follow-up years. The cumulative median per-person cost (healthcare- and productivity-related) over three follow-up years was similar for patients diagnosed in 2001-2005 (€25,621) and 2011-2015 (€26,592), despite a 12% increase in three-year OS over the same period. Conclusion The availability of new treatment options for MM patients in Sweden over time was associated with less healthcare usage, less time spent in healthcare and lower productivity loss due to sickness absence for both ASCT and non-ASCT-treated patients. These improved clinical and economic outcomes provide policy makers, healthcare providers and physicians with invaluable real-world insights for cost-benefit considerations in the continued development and introduction of effective treatments for MM. Figure 1 Disclosures Borgsten: Janssen: Current Employment. Gatopoulou:Janssen: Current Employment. Pisini:Janssen: Current Employment. Tambour:Janssen: Current Employment, Current equity holder in publicly-traded company. Schain:Schain Research: Current Employment, Current equity holder in private company, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Divested equity in a private or publicly-traded company in the past 24 months, Ended employment in the past 24 months. Jones:Schain Research: Current Employment. Kwok:Schain Research: Other: Internship . Hjortsberg:Janssen: Current Employment.

Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs Associated with Venous Thromboembolism Recurrence in Patients with Cancer

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 4734-4734
Author(s):  
Alok A. Khorana ◽  
Keith R. McCrae ◽  
Dejan Milentijevic ◽  
Jonathan Fortier ◽  
François Laliberté ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Healthcare Costs ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Patients With Cancer ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Recurrent Vte

Abstract Introduction: Patients with cancer are not only at a high risk for developing primary but also recurrent venous thromboembolism (VTE). These events lead to increased burden of cancer management and healthcare costs. It was estimated that all-cause health care costs for cancer patients with VTE were $30,538/patient higher than in those without VTE (Khorana, 2013). To our knowledge, very little information exists on cost of VTE recurrence among cancer patients. The objective of this study was to analyze resource utilization and costs of patients with cancer experiencing a VTE recurrence using a large claims database. Methods: Medical and pharmacy claims from the Humana Database between 1/1/2013 and 05/31/2015 were analyzed. Newly diagnosed cancer patients with a first VTE diagnosis occurring after their first cancer diagnosis and with ≥1 dispensing of an anticoagulant agent within 7 days after their VTE diagnosis, were selected. Baseline characteristics were evaluated during the 6 month period prior to the index VTE. VTE recurrences were defined as hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of VTE. Patients were classified into two groups: patients who experienced a VTE recurrence and patients who did not. Resource utilization and costs were evaluated for the entire follow up period, starting with the initiation of the anticoagulant therapy until whichever was earlier, end of eligibility or end of data. Healthcare resource utilization evaluated included number of hospitalizations, hospitalization days, emergency room (ER) visits, and outpatient visits. All-cause and VTE-related healthcare resource utilization was evaluated. Comparisons between patients with a VTE recurrence and patients without a VTE recurrence were performed using rate ratios (RR) and statistical differences between groups as well as 95% confidence intervals [95% CI] were calculated using Poisson regression models. All-cause and VTE-related healthcare costs were evaluated in per-patient-per-year (PPPY) and compared using mean cost difference. Results: A total of 2,428 newly diagnosed cancer patients who developed VTE and were treated with anticoagulants were identified. Of these, 413 (17.1%) experienced recurrent VTE during the follow up period. Patients who developed recurrent VTE and those who did not were similar in terms of age, gender, race, and region. No statistically significant differences between groups were observed in Charlson comorbidity index or in selected comorbidities during the 6 month baseline period. However, more patients with recurrent VTE recurrence had their index VTE documented during a hospitalization (61.3% vs. 55.4%, p=0.03). Patients with a VTE recurrence had significantly more ER and outpatient visits at baseline compared to those without recurrence, but no statistically significant difference was observed in baseline total healthcare costs ($29,352 vs. $27,955, p=0.44, respectively). The mean follow-up was similar between groups: 9.6 months for patients experiencing a VTE recurrence and 9.3 months for patients without a VTE recurrence (p=0.4059). Patients with a VTE recurrence had higher all-cause resource utilization rates (RRs; 95% CI) compared to patients without a VTE recurrence (hospitalization [2.37; 2.23 - 2.52], hospitalization days [2.64; 2.57 - 2.72], ER visits [1.62; 1.48 - 1.76], and outpatient visits [1.26; 1.24 - 1.28]). The rates of VTE-related hospitalization and VTE-related hospitalization days were close to $30,000 higher in patients with a VTE recurrence (Figure 1). The all-cause healthcare costs were $84,708 PPPY in patients with a VTE recurrence compared to $44,903 in patients without a VTE recurrence. The difference was mainly explained by lower VTE-related hospitalization costs (Figure 2). Conclusion: This real-world claims analysis showed that cancer patients with recurrent VTE consume significantly more healthcare resources. Total healthcare costs were nearly 2-fold higher in cohort with than in cohort without VTE recurrence. Close to 75% of the total cost difference was associated with VTE recurrence. VTE-related costs were ~4-fold higher in cohort with than in cohort without VTE recurrence. Reducing VTE recurrence in patients with cancer could lead to substantial healthcare cost savings. Figure 1 VTE-Related Healthcare Resource Utilization Figure 1. VTE-Related Healthcare Resource Utilization Figure 2 VTE-Related Healthcare Costs, PPPY Figure 2. VTE-Related Healthcare Costs, PPPY Disclosures Khorana: Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bayer: Consultancy, Honoraria; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria; Halozyme: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Leo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria. McCrae:Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Milentijevic:Janssen Scientific Affairs: Employment, Equity Ownership. Fortier:Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding. Laliberté:Janssen Scientific Affairs: Research Funding. Crivera:Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC, Raritan, New Jersey: Employment, Equity Ownership. Lefebvre:Janssen Scientific Affairs: Research Funding. Schein:Johnson & Johnson: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Own in excess of $10,000 of J&J stock.

scholarly journals Global Expression Changes of Malignant Plasma Cells over Time Reveals the Evolutionary Development of Signatures of Aggressive Clinical Behavior

Blood ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 132 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 4457-4457
Author(s):  
Eileen M Boyle ◽  
Adam Rosenthal ◽  
Yan Wang ◽  
Phil Farmer ◽  
Michael W Rutherford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Plasma Cells ◽  
Adverse Outcome ◽  
Patient Specific ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Over Time

Abstract Introduction: Clustering of gene expression signatures at diagnosis has identified a number of distinct disease groups that correlate with outcome in multiple myeloma (MM). Some of these are defined by an etiologic genetic event whereas others, such as the proliferation cluster (PR) and GEP70 risk relate to acquired clinical behaviors regardless of the underlying background. The PR cluster has a number of important features, including markers of proliferation, and has been associated with an adverse outcome. This logic led us to study how gene expression patterns change over time with the aim of gaining insight into acquired features that could be targeted therapeutically or be used to predict outcome. Methods: We followed 784 newly diagnosed MM patients from the Total Therapy trials over a median of 9.5 years for whom repeated GEP of CD138+ plasma cells using Affymetrix U133 Plus 2.0 plus arrays were obtained. Raw data were MAS5 normalized and GEP70-based high-risk (HR) scores, translocation classification (TC) and molecular cluster classification were derived, as previously reported. Results: At diagnosis, 85.9% percent of patients (666/784) were identified as low-risk (LR). Among them, 23.1% (154/666) went on to develop HR status (defined by a GEP70 score > 0.66) at least once after initial diagnosis. Among the non-PR cases, 28.5% (193/677) were seen to develop a PR phenotype at some point during follow-up. Similarly, among the PR patients (n=107), we observed that 43.1% (25/58) identified as LR by GEP70 at presentation eventually develop HR status at least once during follow-up. We further analyzed 147 patients with paired diagnosis and relapse samples. Seventeen percent of patients (25/147) were PR at diagnosis. Most patients were from favorable TC prognostic groups [80% D1-D2, 8% t(11;14), 8% t(4;14) and 4% t(14;20)]. Seventy-six percent of PR patients remained PR at relapse (19/25) whereas 23% switched cluster in accordance to their translocation group. Fifteen percent of patients (22/147) became PR at relapse. They originated from four clusters and three TC groups [77% from the D1-D2, 14% t(4;14) and 9% from the t(11;14)]. Overall-survival from the time of relapse was inferior for patients categorized as PR at relapse compared to other subgroups (p< 0.0001); among PR patients at relapse, there was no difference in outcome between patients classified as PR or non-PR at diagnosis (p= 0.74). When looking at GEP70 defined risk scores, the incidence of HR status rose from 23% to 39% between diagnosis and relapse with a significant increase in mean GEP70 scores using paired t-test (p<0.0001). Patients identified as HR by GEP70 at relapse had an inferior post-relapse outcome compared to patients identified as LR (p< 0.0001); there was no difference in the outcome of patients identified as HR at relapse depending on their risk status at diagnosis (p = 0.10). Discussion: Following the introduction of therapeutic regimens aimed at maximizing response, long term survival in MM has improved. This also led to an apparent increase in the development of more aggressive disease patterns at relapse including extra-medullary disease and plasma cell leukemia. Here we show, that HR features both in terms of PR and GEP70 risk status, develop as a variable over time. At relapse, most acquired HR cases originate from standard-risk presentation cases, suggesting selective pressure for HR features. Moreover, we show that the detection of such behaviors is associated with an adverse outcome from the time of relapse. These data also suggest that repeating GEP during follow-up adds precision to better comprehend individual risk and may help identify patient specific therapeutic strategies. Indeed, understanding how these patterns develop, which genes are implicated, and their impact on the immune microenvironment should allow us to effectively utilize a wide array of treatment approaches ranging from immune-therapies to novel cell-cycle targeting agents to specifically address this type of aggressive behavior. Conclusion: The acquisition of high risk patterns captured by GEP70 risk and PR status is an ongoing process from initial diagnosis. Such high risk prognostic features have an adverse outcome from the time of development. Repeating GEP during follow-up may therefore help better predict outcome and identify patient specific therapeutic strategies. Disclosures Boyle: Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel grants; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Gilead: Honoraria, Other: travel grants; Abbvie: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria, Other: travel grants; La Fondation de Frace: Research Funding; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: travel grants. Dumontet:Janssen: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Merck: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria. Facon:Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding. Barlogie:Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation: Other: travel stipend; European School of Haematology- International Conference on Multiple Myeloma: Other: travel stipend; Dana Farber Cancer Institute: Other: travel stipend; Millenium: Consultancy, Research Funding; ComtecMed- World Congress on Controversies in Hematology: Other: travel stipend; Myeloma Health, LLC: Patents & Royalties: : Co-inventor of patents and patent applications related to use of GEP in cancer medicine licensed to Myeloma Health, LLC; International Workshop on Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia: Other: travel stipend. Davies:TRM Oncology: Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; ASH: Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MMRF: Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Morgan:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria.

A Phase 3 Study Evaluating the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide Combined with Melphalan and Prednisone In Patients ≥ 65 Years with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM): Continuous Use of Lenalidomide Vs Fixed-Duration Regimens

Blood ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 116 (21) ◽  
pp. 622-622 ◽  
Author(s):  
Antonio Palumbo ◽  
Michel Delforge ◽  
John Catalano ◽  
Roman Hajek ◽  
Martin Kropff ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Fixed Duration ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 622 Background: Lenalidomide is an oral IMiD® compound with a dual mechanism of action, namely tumoricidal and immunomodulatory activity, and has proven efficacy in patients with MM. The current study (MM-015) is a prospective, randomized phase 3 trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of continuous lenalidomide treatment (MPR-R: melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance) vs fixed-duration regimens of melphalan and prednisone (MP) or melphalan, prednisone, and lenalidomide (MPR) in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Methods: 459 patients aged ≥ 65 years with NDMM, stratified by age and International Staging System (ISS) stage were randomized to receive MPR-R, MPR, or MP. During double-blind treatment, patients received melphalan 0.18 mg/kg (D1-4), prednisone 2 mg/kg (D1-4), with or without lenalidomide 10 mg/day (D1-21) for nine 28-day cycles. Following 9 cycles of MPR, patients received maintenance lenalidomide (10 mg/day; D1-21) or placebo until progression; MP patients received placebo until progression. Patients with progressive disease (PD) could enroll in the open-label extension phase (OLEP) and receive lenalidomide at 25 mg/day (D1-21) with or without dexamethasone at 40 mg/day (D1-4, 9–12, and 17–20). The primary comparison for this trial was MPR-R vs MP. Updated data from a pre-planned interim analysis at 70% of events (median follow-up of 21 months) are presented. Results: MPR-R compared with MP resulted in a higher overall response rate (ORR; 77% vs 50%, P <.001) as well as higher rates of complete response (16% vs 4%, P < .001) and very good partial response (VGPR) or better (32% vs 12%, P < .001). Responses were more rapid in patients receiving MPR-R compared with MP (median 2 vs 3 months, P < .001), and improved over time. Overall, MPR-R reduced the risk of disease progression by 58% compared with MP (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.423, P < .001) with a higher 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate (55% vs 16%). PFS was extended in patients receiving continuous lenalidomide therapy vs fixed-duration MP regardless of gender, ISS stage (stage I/II vs III), kidney function (creatinine clearance ≥ 60 vs < 60 mL/min), or baseline β2-microglobulin (≤ 5.5 vs > 5.5 mg/L). A landmark analysis comparing MPR-R and MPR initiated at the beginning of cycle 10 demonstrated that maintenance lenalidomide resulted in a 69% reduced risk of progression compared with placebo (HR = 0.314, P < .001). In addition, regardless of induction response (≥ VGPR or PR), patients who received maintenance lenalidomide had longer PFS compared with placebo. Importantly, patients relapsing during MPR-R had similar second-line treatment duration (median 55 weeks) compared with those relapsing while on placebo following MPR or MP (median 68 and 54 weeks, respectively). Additionally, PD rates during the OLEP were similar across all treatments (13% for each). Thus, outcomes of patients who relapse following continuous lenalidomide are similar to those who relapse following fixed-duration regimens, suggesting maintenance lenalidomide is not associated with more aggressive relapse. Follow-up remains too short to identify significant overall survival differences between the 3 groups. MPR-R had a manageable safety profile with minimal cumulative toxicities. Discontinuation rates due to adverse events (AEs) for patients treated with MPR-R and MP were 20% and 8%, respectively. Grade 3/4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and anemia occurred in 71%, 38%, and 24% of patients receiving MPR-R and 30%, 14%, and 17% of those receiving MP; no grade 3/4 peripheral neuropathy was observed. Importantly, maintenance lenalidomide was as well tolerated as placebo, with few grade 3/4 AEs. During maintenance, low rates of thrombocytopenia (3% vs 2%, respectively), neutropenia (2% vs 0%), deep vein thrombosis (1% vs 0%), and fatigue (1% vs 0%) were observed. Conclusions: MPR-R achieved a higher ORR, as well as better quality and more rapid responses vs MP. Furthermore, MPR-R compared with fixed-duration regimens of MP and MPR resulted in an unprecedented reduction in the risk of progression with a manageable safety profile, and similar rates of PD in subsequent OLEP treatment. These data suggest that continuous lenalidomide therapy with MPR-R is superior to regimens of limited duration by providing sustained disease control in transplant-ineligible patients with NDMM. Disclosures: Palumbo: Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen Cilag: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pharmion: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide is not approved for first line use in multiple myeloma. Delforge:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Ortho-Biotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria. Catalano:Celgene: Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Travel Grants. Hajek:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Kropff:OrthoBiotech: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau. Petrucci:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria. Yu:Celgene: Employment. Herbein:Celgene: Employment. Mei:Celgene: Employment. Jacques:Celgene: Employment. Dimopoulos:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

scholarly journals Patient Characteristics, Treatment Outcomes and Healthcare Resource Utilization across Europe in Multiple Myeloma Patients Ineligible for Stem Cell Transplantation Who Received Lenalidomide- or Bortezomib-Based Regimens

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 4772-4772
Author(s):  
Elena Zamagni ◽  
Sujith Dhanasiri ◽  
Adam Moore ◽  
Arun Ghale ◽  
Murielle Roussel
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Stem Cell ◽  
Health Outcomes ◽  
Real World ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Advisory Board ◽  
To Receive

BACKGROUND: ESMO guidelines (Moreau P, et al. Ann Oncol. 2017) recommend lenalidomide- (LEN) and bortezomib-based (BORT) regimens as first line (1L) treatment (tx) options for patients (pts) with multiple myeloma (MM) who are ineligible for stem cell transplantation (NSCT). The aim of this study was to determine tx outcomes and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) for pts with NSCT MM receiving 1L LEN- or BORT-based regimens in 7 European countries. METHODS: Physicians from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and Netherlands abstracted retrospective data from medical records of pts with MM who received 1L LEN- or 1L BORT-based regimens between Jun 1 2015 and Nov 30 2016. Data were abstracted during Q1-2 2019 to allow adequate follow up time to assess outcomes of interest. Data collected included pt demographics, clinical characteristics, tx patterns, health outcomes (e.g. progression free survival [PFS], time to next tx [TTNT]), and HCRU (e.g. supportive tx, hospitalizations, healthcare professional [HCP] visits, monitoring tests). Health outcomes were compared for LEN- and BORT-based regimens using the Kaplan-Meier estimator. HCRU was calculated as means per month (mo), per usage type, to account for variation in tx duration. Patients with complete resource use data for an HCRU category were included in the analysis for that category. RESULTS: 59 physicians provided data on 453 pts. A total of 220 (48.6%) pts received 1L LEN- and 233 (51.4%) received 1L BORT-based regimens. The most common 1L LEN- and BORT-based regimens were LEN + dexamethasone (DEX; n = 194) and LEN + prednisone (PRED; n = 15), and BORT + melphalan + PRED (n = 94) and BORT + DEX (n = 82), respectively. Mean follow up time was similar for both regimens (38.2 vs 39.4 mo, respectively). Demographic profiles of pts receiving 1L LEN- or BORT-based regimens were similar (P > 0.05 for all demographic variables); time from diagnosis to start of 1L, performance status at first tx, comorbidities, CRAB criteria, bone lesions at diagnosis, or cytogenetic testing did not differ significantly. Within the follow up period, pts treated with 1L LEN-based regimens received significantly fewer lines of tx (mean [SD] 1.55 [0.64] vs 1.75 [0.69] lines; P < 0.01) vs pts treated with 1L BORT-based regimens. Of the 233 pts receiving 1L BORT-based regimens,142 went on to receive 2L tx, of whom 104 (73%) received a second-line (2L) LEN-based regimen. Of the 220 pts receiving 1L LEN-based regimens, 105 went on to receive 2L tx, of whom 50 (48%) received a 2L BORT-based regimen. Health outcomes: Significant differences in PFS (P < 0.01) were observed; the probability of maintaining PFS was higher for pts receiving 1L LEN- vs 1L BORT-based regimens at 12 (94% vs 85%) and 24 mo (76% vs 63%) post-1L initiation. A significantly longer TTNT (median 45.7 vs 36.5 mo; P < 0.01) was observed for pts receiving 1L LEN vs those receiving 1L BORT. A significantly longer time to third line (3L) tx was estimated for pts receiving 1L LEN- vs 1L BORT-based regimens: approximately 15% of 1L LEN pts had started 3L tx at 48 mo vs 22% of 1L BORT pts (P = 0.01). From a sequencing perspective, a trend toward longer time to 3L tx was observed for pts receiving 1L LEN followed by 2L BORT vs pts receiving 1L BORT followed by 2L LEN (P = 0.11). HCRU: Across the follow up period, no differences were observed, with low overall HCRU observed for each cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Following the approval of LEN in the 1L setting, physicians have more options when treating NDMM. The findings of this study suggest that in a real-world setting, health outcomes are significantly better for NSCT pts with NDMM who receive 1L LEN- vs 1L BORT-based regimens. A US claims database study also suggested that LEN-based tx is associated with longer TTNT (Chari A, et al Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk). In this analysis, 1L LEN-based regimens extended the time to 3L tx, potentially delaying progression to use of and associated cost impact of expensive tx in later line settings. Longer duration on 1L tx may also be expected to reduce total per pt per mo (PPPM) costs, as reported by a US study (Arikian SR, et al. Curr Med Res Opin). In our study, routine tx-related HCP visits were not explicitly captured and so the data may not accurately reflect differences in HCRU for pts receiving 1L LEN- vs 1L BORT-based regimens. This study provides real-world evidence to support 1L LEN-based regimens as providing clinically meaningful benefits for pts. Disclosures Zamagni: Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Other: Advisory board, Speakers Bureau; BMS: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Honoraria, Other: Advisory Board, Speakers Bureau. Dhanasiri:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Moore:Adelphi Real World: Employment. Ghale:Adelphi Real World: Employment. Roussel:Janssen: Honoraria, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; takeda: Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; Amgen: Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Other: travel fees, lecture fees, Research Funding.

Treatment Patterns and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Patients with Multiple Myeloma and Baseline Renal Impairment

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 17-18
Author(s):  
Parameswaran Hari ◽  
Lita Araujo ◽  
Dominick Latremouille-Viau ◽  
Peggy Lin ◽  
Mikhail Davidson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Renal Impairment ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Real World ◽  
Economic Burden ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Treatment Patterns ◽  
Analysis Group

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 &gt;60 days), discontinuation of all agents (for &gt;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.

scholarly journals Analysis of Healthcare Resource Utilization and Costs after the Initiation of Biologic Treatment in Patients with Ulcerative Colitis and Crohn’s Disease

10.36469/9791 ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (1) ◽  
pp. 96-112 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Perera ◽  
Shibing Yang ◽  
Marni Stott-Miller ◽  
Joanne Brady
Keyword(s):  
Ulcerative Colitis ◽  
Crohn’S Disease ◽  
Crohn's Disease ◽  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Small Sample ◽  
Outpatient Visits ◽  
Ed Visits

Background: This retrospective cohort study aimed to describe and quantify healthcare resource utilization and costs for patients with ulcerative colitis (UC) and Crohn’s disease (CD) following initiation of biologic therapy. Methods: Resource utilization and costs were analyzed at baseline and 1- and 2-years after initiating a biologic. Data were extracted from a US administrative health insurance claims database for adults ≥18 years. Eligible patients were continuously enrolled in a health plan with medical and pharmacy benefits for ≥12 months prior to, and 12 months (primary analysis) or 24 months (secondary analysis) after index date (biologic initiation). Results: In total, 4864 and 2692 patients with UC, and 8910 and 5227 patients with CD were identified in the 1- and 2-year follow-up cohorts, respectively. Of 1-year follow-up cohort patients, 45% received the same biologic initiated at index for ≥1 year. Infliximab and adalimumab were the most commonly initiated biologics in patients with UC or CD. The highest proportion of patients who continued with the same biologic after 1-and 2-years had initiated therapy with infliximab for both indications (although at the 1-year follow-up for CD, the highest proportion continued to use natalizumab, but this was a small sample [n=15]). Generally, the proportion of patients having inpatient admissions and emergency department (ED) visits decreased after receiving the same biologic for 1 year compared with baseline, although the proportion having outpatient visits did not change. Mean per patient all-cause costs for inpatient hospitalizations, ED visits and outpatient visits decreased for patients with UC or CD who received the same biologic for 1 year, while mean pharmacy costs per patient increased. Conclusions; This descriptive analysis shows that although biologics effectively reduced inpatient and ED resource utilization and corresponding costs in patients with UC and CD, total management costs increased, driven by increased pharmacy costs.

scholarly journals 2374. Healthcare Resource Use, Costs, and Recurrences in Patients with Clostridioides difficile Infection: A Real-world Data Analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 6 (Supplement_2) ◽  
pp. S819-S819
Author(s):  
Winnie Nelson ◽  
Laura Stong ◽  
Naomi Sacks ◽  
Alexandria Portelli ◽  
Bridget Healey ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Resource Utilization ◽  
Resource Use ◽  
Healthcare Resource ◽  
Healthcare Resource Utilization ◽  
Healthcare Resource Use ◽  
Diagnosis Code ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile ◽  
Clostridioides Difficile Infection ◽  
Ed Visits

Abstract Background Clostridioides difficile infection (CDI), especially recurrent CDI (rCDI), is associated with high morbidity and resource use and imposes a significant burden on the US healthcare system. The objective of this study was to evaluate the burden of rCDI on healthcare resource utilization. Methods A retrospective study analyzed commercial claims data from patients aged 18–64 years old in the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus™ database. CDI episodes required an inpatient stay with CDI diagnosis code (ICD-9-CM 008.45; ICD-10-CM A04.7, A04.71, A04.72), or an outpatient medical claim with CDI diagnosis code plus a CDI treatment, and index episodes occurred from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2017. Only patients who were observable 6 months before and 12 months after the index CDI episode were included. Each CDI episode was followed by a 14-day claim-free period after the end of treatment. rCDI was defined as another CDI episode within an 8-week window immediately after the claim-free period. Number of CDI and rCDI episodes, healthcare resource use, and costs were calculated over 12-month follow-up and stratified by number of rCDI episodes. Costs were adjusted to 2018 dollars. Results 46,571 patients with an index CDI episode were included, with 3,129 (6.7%) who had 1 rCDI, 472 (1.0%) who had 2 rCDI, and 134 (0.3%) who had 3+ rCDI episodes. Mean age was 47.4 years, and 62.4% were female. In the 12-month follow-up, the mean (SD) numbers of inpatient visits were 1.4 (2.1) for those with no rCDI, 2.7 (3.4) for those with 1 rCDI, 3.7 (3.9) for those with 2 rCDI, and 5.8 (6.0) for those with 3+ rCDI episodes. Emergency department (ED) visits had a similar trend, with mean (SD) number of visits of 1.5 (3.5), 2.5 (6.0), 3.7 (7.0), and 4.6 (13), respectively for the four study groups. All-cause costs after the index CDI were $71,980 for those with no rCDI, $131,953 for those with 1 rCDI, $180,574 for those with 2 rCDI, and $207,733 for those with 3+ rCDI. Conclusion CDI and rCDI are associated with substantial healthcare resource utilization and direct medical costs. During the 12 months after an index CDI episode, the number of inpatient admissions and ED visits increased substantially for patients with an rCDI episode. Direct medical costs for patients with rCDI also increased with number of recurrences. Disclosures All authors: No reported disclosures.

Clinical Outcomes of Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Receiving Triplet Therapy in the Connect MM® Disease Registry

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 4229-4229
Author(s):  
Jatin J. Shah ◽  
Rafat Abonour ◽  
Mohit Narang ◽  
Jayesh Mehta ◽  
Howard R. Terebelo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Employment Equity ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Equity Ownership ◽  
Triplet Regimen

Abstract Introduction: Triplet therapies are used for treatment (Tx) of both transplant-eligible and -ineligible patients (pts) with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). Actual patterns and outcomes of Tx are not fully understood. Connect MM® is the first and largest multicenter, US-based, prospective observational cohort study designed to characterize Tx patterns and outcomes for pts with NDMM. This analysis describes demographic and disease characteristics of pts who received triplet Tx as an induction regimen and for whom transplant was or was not intended. The analysis explores the relationship of these factors with overall survival (OS) and other efficacy endpoints. Patients and Methods: Pts aged ≥ 18 y with NDMM within 60 days of diagnosis were eligible for enrollment regardless of disease severity, medical history, or comorbidities. Data including transplant intent (yes/no) was collected at baseline; follow-up data was collected quarterly thereafter. Based on the initial intent, 2 groups were identified: patients with intent to transplant who received transplant (TT) and pts with no intent to transplant who did not receive a transplant (NT). Triplet Tx was defined as the combination of ≥ 3 concurrent therapeutic agents in the first course of Tx (within 56 days of study entry). KM analysis adjusted for age was conducted for OS. Because decisions on use of transplant and triplet therapy are influenced by multiple factors, a multivariable Cox regression analysis was performed to evaluate the contribution of the triplet therapy (yes/no) to OS and was adjusted for other variables, including age, comorbidities, and ISS staging. Results: Between September 2009 and December 2011, 1493 pts were enrolled. This analysis was on 1436 pts: 650 pts with transplant intent and 786 pts without transplant intent. The data cutoff date was November 30, 2014, and the median follow-up for overall survival (OS) was 33.8 mos. Of pts with transplant intent, 451 (69%) received transplant (TT) and 199 (31%) did not. Of pts without transplant intent, 62 (8%) received transplant and 724 (92%) did not (NT). The abstract focuses on TT and NT groups only. NT pts tended to be older and have more advanced ISS staging and higher β2-microglobulin levels than TT pts (Table). The most common triplet regimen given during the first course treatment (within 56 days) was lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVd). RVd was administered to 34% of the NT pts (76/225) and 59% of the TT pts (152/257). The most common non-triplet regimen was bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd), which was given to 31% of NT pts (156/499) and 38% of TT pts (73/194). Within the NT group, pts given triplet Tx had a lower risk of death than those who did not receive triplet Tx (P = .0013). The multivariable analysis found triplet Tx to be associated with a 36% reduced risk of death (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.64 [95% CI, 0.50-0.82]; P = .001). ISS disease stage (HR = 1.43 [95% CI, 1.21-1.69]; P < .001) and history of diabetes (HR = 1.38 [95% CI, 1.08-1.78]; P = .012) were negative prognostic factors for OS. Within the TT group, pts who received triplet Tx did not attain an OS benefit (P = .8993), and no baseline characteristics were significantly associated with OS. These results may be limited by other factors not considered that may have influenced physicians' choice of treatment, including the use of maintenance therapy and a short follow-up period of 33.8 months. Conclusions: Triplet Tx as a first regimen is associated with longer OS in pts without transplant intent who did not receive a transplant. RVd and Vd were the most common first Tx regimens, respectively. Continued follow-up of these pts and enrollment of an additional cohort will provide additional data with mature follow-up. Table 1. Table 1. Disclosures Shah: Bristol-Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Array: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Onyx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding; Merck: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Abonour:Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Narang:Celgene: Speakers Bureau. Mehta:Celgene Corporation: Speakers Bureau. Terebelo:Millenium: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Pharmacylics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Gasparetto:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Millennium: Honoraria, Other: Export Board Committee, Speakers Bureau. Toomey:Celgene: Consultancy. Hardin:Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Srinivasan:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Larkins:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Nagarwala:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Rifkin:Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA, a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document