Meta-Analytic Summary of the Burden of Pain and Fatigue in Multiple Myeloma

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 5967-5967
Author(s):  
Peter C. Trask ◽  
Mark Atkinson ◽  
Bhumi Trivedi ◽  
Andrew Palsgrove ◽  
William Benton Jones ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Sensitivity Analysis ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Clinical Group ◽  
Common Symptom ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Aims: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a hematologic malignancy of plasma cells. Bone disease is a characteristic symptom of MM, and pain is one of its most distressing features. Anemia is also a common symptom and is manifested as fatigue and tiredness among MM patients. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the EORTC QLQ-C30 pain and fatigue scales in two clinical MM populations (one with newly-diagnosed MM and a second undergoing medical management with re-emergent or advanced myeloma) to more precisely quantify the burden of pain and fatigue in MM. Methods: Studies assessing pain and fatigue in MM were identified through a search of specific terms in the medical-subject headings and keywords in PubMed. Inclusion criteria were English-language studies published between January 1, 1996, and July 1, 2014; diagnosis of MM; and availability of data on pain and/or fatigue as measured by the EORTC QLQ-C30. Full-text articles from germane abstracts were retrieved for eligibility assessment, and 27 articles were selected for inclusion in the analysis. Two groups of peer-reviewed articles were created: one consisting of publications that focused on newly-diagnosed MM and the other consisting of articles involving MM patients with advanced conditions, including those who had a disease recurrence or were receiving autologous bone marrow transplantation. The mean values and standard deviations (SDs) were recorded across all publications irrespective of sex, age, and stage of illness. Of the 27 studies, 17 did not report standard error (SE) or SD values associated with EORTC QLQ-C30 pain and fatigue scales. These missing values were estimated using the overall average of SDs for that scale observed across all studies within the publication group (either newly-diagnosed or recurrent/advanced disease). A sensitivity analysis was conducted to compare the pooled mean and SEs associated with results obtained with and without the SD imputation procedure. The means and SDs from the two sets of publications were entered into Comprehensive Meta-analysis™ with both scales (pain or fatigue) and existing or imputed SDs as grouping variables. The summary means and confidence intervals for each scale by clinical group were computed by weighting the individual studies by sample size and were statistically summarized based on a fixed-effect model. Results: The EORTC QLQ-C30 fatigue and pain scales range from 0-100 with higher scores indicating greater symptoms (i.e., more fatigue and pain). The overall mean across the 27 publications was 47.1 for fatigue and 48.2 for pain for MM patients compared to scores of 25.0 and 16.9 for a general population. The results of the sensitivity analysis indicated that estimation of the SDs for those studies missing the statistic did not have a significant effect on the summary mean estimate. In most cases, the inclusion of additional means with estimated SDs reduced the summary SE estimate associated with the summary mean. Overall, the scores for fatigue and pain across research articles involving newly-diagnosed patients (fatigue=48.5 and pain=49.1) were statistically higher (indicating worse pain and fatigue) than among patients who were recurrent or receiving more aggressive treatments (fatigue=39.9 and pain=38.7). Conclusions: The burden of pain and fatigue in MM is substantial and is different between newly-diagnosed and more advanced MM patients. Pain and fatigue can be easily quantified using standardized health-related quality of life instruments. Pivotal clinical trials in MM need to assess the impact of novel treatments on pain and fatigue. Disclosures Trask: Sanofi: Employment. Atkinson:Sanofi: Research Funding. Trivedi:Sanofi: Research Funding. Palsgrove:Sanofi: Research Funding. Jones:Sanofi: Employment. McHorney:Sanofi: Research Funding.

scholarly journals The Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Quality of Life in Danish Patients with Multiple Myeloma; Results from an Ongoing Longitudinal National Survey

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 1638-1638
Author(s):  
Louise Redder ◽  
Sören Möller ◽  
Anna Thit Johnsen ◽  
Mary Jarden ◽  
Christen lykkegaard Andersen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
P Value ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Second Wave

Abstract Background: The severe, acute respiratory syndrome, coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), leading to coronavirus-19 (COVID-19), was detected for the first time in Wuhan, China in December 2019. In general, governments and health authorities have taken precautions during the COVID-19 pandemic to reduce viral spread and protect vulnerable citizens. Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) have an increased risk of being infected with COVID-19 and developing a fatal course due to the MM-related immunodeficiency (Glenthøj, A et al. PMID: 32939853). To some extent, the COVID-19 pandemic has changed standard of care towards extended use of oral regimens and limiting hospital visits (Terpos E et al.PMID: 32444866). We aimed to investigate the quality of life (QoL) of Danish patients with MM during the COVID-19 pandemic. We hypothesized that patients living alone and those under the age of 65 years, as a consequence of the pandemic, would experience impaired QoL due to social isolation and fear of infection with SARS-CoV-2. Methods: The Danish prospective, nation-wide, observational survey "Quality of life in Danish patients with multiple myeloma" (QoL-MM) (Nielsen LK et al. PMID: 30656677) framed our study. In QoL-MM, survey data are obtained at enrolment and subsequently at 12 follow-up time points over a two-year period. The following PRO questionnaires are used; the cancer-generic instrument of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of life (EORTC) QLQ-C30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), the Multiple Myeloma module QLQ-MY20 (EORTC QLQ-MY20), the Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy module (EORTC QLQ-CIPN20) and the Short-form health survey version 2 (SF12v2). In the present study, a subpopulation of the QoL-MM cohort was constructed, based on the response time of the questionnaires. QoL was compared using patient-reported outcome (PRO) data obtained before and during the COVID-19 pandemic at group level. In a Danish context, first wave was defined as April to June 2020 and the second wave as November 2020 to January 2021. The QoL data were analyzed using mixed effects linear regression, with a year-period-interaction. Pre-COVID versus COVID mean domain score difference was considered evident, if the difference was both statistically significant (p-value <0.05) and clinically relevant, using minimal important difference (MID) defined as 0.3 standard deviation of the mean score. Results: The study included 616 patients (63% newly diagnosed and 37% relapsed) with a mean age of 68.2 years (standard deviation, 9.2); 40% were females; 76% were married/cohabiting, and 24% single. Questionnaire completion rates during the investigated periods were between 96% and 97%. In total, 1,685 completed sets of questionnaires were included in the analyses. The patients reported no statistically significant and clinically relevant difference in QoL during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic, compared to one year earlier, see table 1. When analyzing the subpopulations, we found that patients below 65 years reported improved physical health summaries (p-value 0.016), decreased fatigue (p-value < 0.001), less insomnia (p-value 0.002) and improved role functioning (p-value <0.001) during the first wave, reaching both statistical significance and the threshold of MID. The group of patients living alone reported improved role functioning during the first wave, reaching both statistical significance (p-value <0.001) and the threshold of MID. These findings were not evident during the second wave, see table 1. Conclusion: As a group, Danish patients with MM did not report impaired QoL during the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrary, we observed improvements in some domains in patients below 65 years. Our observations indicate that the patients with MM have felt cared for and in good hands during the first and second waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, part of the reason for our finding of no negative impact on QoL by the pandemic could be that the questionnaires used were not developed to capture the impact of the pandemic on QoL. Importantly, our results suggest that QoL data collected in clinical trials during the pandemic allow interpretation without adjusting for the impact of the pandemic. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Redder: Janssen-Ciliag: Research Funding. Frederiksen: Alexion: Research Funding; Gilead: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding.

Melphalan and Prednisone (MP) Versus Melphalan, Prednisone and Thalidomide (MPT) as Initial Therapy for Previously Untreated Elderly and/or Transplant Ineligible Patients with Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Blood ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 114 (22) ◽  
pp. 615-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
S. Vincent Rajkumar ◽  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Martha Q. Lacy ◽  
David Dingli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Randomized Controlled Trials ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Individual Patient Data ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Patient Data ◽  
Controlled Trials ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Abstract 615 Background: Trials comparing efficacy of standard melphalan prednisone (MP) therapy with MP plus thalidomide (T) in the transplant ineligible, elderly patients with multiple myeloma have provided conflicting evidence. While there is greater agreement with regard to superior response rates (RR) with the addition of T to MP in elderly patients, the impact on progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) is less clear with some trials showing an improvement in PFS and/or OS with MPT and others demonstrating no difference in outcomes. We performed a systematic review to integrate the existing outcome data related to the efficacy of MP vs. MPT using a meta-analytic approach. Methods: A comprehensive search of electronic database through July 31st, 2009 was performed for publications, abstracts and presentations to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing MP with MPT. A meta-analysis was performed by pooling results on clinical endpoints of RR, PFS and OS reported in all the identified RCTs under a random effects model. We did not have access to individual patient data from these trials. Results: Overall, five prospective RCTs (3 published articles and 2 abstracts) comparing MP with MPT regimen and comprising a total of 1571 patients were identified. For the endpoints of OS and PFS, data were extractable only from 4 RCTs (abstract by Gulbrandsen et al. was excluded). The Bregg and Egger funnel plot for OS demonstrated a symmetric distribution (P = 0.6) indicating no significant publication bias. The test of heterogeneity among all RCTs was statistically significant in the estimate of RR (tau2=0.21; chi2=16.33; p=0.003 (df=4); I2 = 75.5%), but not significant for the estimates of PFS (tau2=0.01; chi2=4.61; p=0.2 (df=3); I2 = 34.9%), and OS (tau2=0.02; chi2=5.53; p=0.14 (df=3); I2 = 45.8%). As expected, the pooled odds ratio of responding to treatment with MP versus MPT was 0.307 (P<0.001) indicating that MP was worse than MPT in achieving at least a partial response. The pooled hazard ratios (HR) for PFS and OS were 1.59 (p<0.001) and 1.34 (p=0.006), respectively (see table for forest plots) in favor of MPT. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis implies that in previously untreated, transplant ineligible elderly patients with multiple myeloma, the addition of thalidomide to melphalan-prednisone demonstrates improved RR, PFS and OS compared with the use of melphalan-prednisone alone. Although the results from a comprehensive individual patient data pooled analysis would give a more precise estimate, our analysis suggests that MPT is superior to MP in terms of response and survival. Disclosures: Dispenzieri: Celgene: Research Funding. Gertz:Celgene: Honoraria. Kumar:celgene, genzyme, millennium, novartis, bayer: Research Funding; genzyme: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Efficacy and Safety of Triplet Versus Doublet Salvage Therapies Among Patients with Multiple Myeloma (MM) Experiencing Early Relapse: Meta-Analysis of Phase III Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs)

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 5344-5344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ajay K. Nooka ◽  
Jonathan L. Kaufman ◽  
Madhusmita Behera ◽  
Charise Gleason ◽  
Hannah Collins ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Mixed Model ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
P Value ◽  
Serious Adverse Events ◽  
Early Relapse ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Relapsed Myeloma

Abstract Introduction: Controversy exists regarding the choice of triplet versus doublet salvage therapy among patients with multiple myeloma (MM) experiencing early relapse. Triplet therapies produce deeper responses (CR, ≥VGPR, ORR) and result in prolonged progression free survival (PFS) while doublet therapies demonstrate an improved toxicity profile. We performed a meta-analysis of the RCTs comparing triplet to doublet salvage regimens in early relapsed myeloma patients (1-3 prior lines of therapy). The objective is to test the hypothesis that triplet regimens are tolerable, improve CR, ≥VGPR, ORR rates and would translate to an improved PFS. Methods: We searched Pubmed, Cochrane databases and ASH, ASCO conference proceedings from 01/2000 through 07/2015 for publications and abstracts to identify the phase III RCTs comparing triplet vs. doublet salvage therapies among patients with relapsed myeloma. A meta-analysis of 4 RCTs (PANORAMA1, MMVAR/IFM 2005-04, ASPIRE, ELOQUENT2 consisting of 2475 patients) was performed using the fixed (Mantel-Haenszel) and random (DerSimonain and Laird) models to calculate the impact of triplets versus doublets (table 1) by evaluating the CR, ≥VGPR, ORR, PFS and toxicities. Mature OS data was not available for the RCTs, hence not included in meta-analysis. The consistency of results (effect sizes) among studies was investigated by means of 2 heterogeneity tests: the χ 2-based Cochran's Q test, and the I2 Statistic. We considered that heterogeneity was present when the P-value of the Cochran's Q test was <.1 and the I2 statistic was > 50%. Results: The pooled odds ratios of ORR, ≥VGPR and CR with triplets vs. doublets were 1.935 (P <0.000; 95% CI: 1.614-2.321); 2.185 (P <0.000; 95% CI: 1.832-2.606); 2.461 (P <0.000; 95% CI: 1.888-3.207) respectively, indicating that the odds of achieving higher quality responses are improved with triplet regimens compared to the use of a doublet regimens. The pooled hazard ratio (HR) for PFS was 0.661 (95% CI 0.596-0.734; P =0.000) in favor of triplet regimens (Figure 1). The Q-statistic for PFS (P =0.725; df =3; I2 = 0.00) suggests homogeneity across studies. Though the relative risk of selected ≥grade 3 serious adverse events (G3 SAE) was higher with triplet regimens (diarrhea, fatigue, thrombocytopenia 2.288 (95% CI 1.637-3.197; P =0.000), 1.654 (95% CI 1.263-2.166; P =0.000), 2.434 (95% CI 1.934-3.063; P =0.000), respectively), the overall G3 SAE were comparable with RR 1.498 (95% CI 1.176-1.908; P =0.001) favoring doublets. Conclusion: Our mixed model meta-analysis demonstrates that triplet regimens in early relapsed myeloma patients result in improved ORR, ≥VGPR, CR and PFS compared to doublets. G3 SAEs are higher with triplet regimens, however this appears to be influenced by the regimen-related toxicity from the PANORAMA1 trial. Appropriate dose modifications or use of selective HDAC inhibitors in future may mitigate the toxicities of the regimen. The pooled estimates ofresponse and survival strongly favor triplets in the early relapsed setting. Table 1. Triplet vs. doublet regimens in RCTs Trial Triplet regimen Doublet regimen PANORAMA1 Panobinostat, bortezomib, dexamethasone Placebo, bortezomib, dexamethasone MMVAR/IFM 2005-04 Bortezomib, thalidomide, Dexamethasone Thalidomide, Dexamethasone ASPIRE Carfilzomib, lenalidomide, Dexamethasone Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone ELOQUENT 2 Elotuzumab, lenalidomide, Dexamethasone Lenalidomide, Dexamethasone Figure 1. VGPR rates and PFS with triplet vs. doublet regimens Figure 1. VGPR rates and PFS with triplet vs. doublet regimens Disclosures Nooka: Spectrum Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Onyx Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy. Kaufman:Onyx: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Novartis: Research Funding; Onyx: Research Funding; Merck: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy. Gleason:Onyx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy. Lonial:Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Research Funding; Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding.

scholarly journals QOLP-31. ASSESSING THE IMPACT OF GLIOBLASTOMA ON WORK PRODUCTIVITY IN PATIENTS AND THEIR CAREGIVERS

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi204-vi204
Author(s):  
Terri Armstrong ◽  
Vinay Puduvalli ◽  
Tobias Walbert ◽  
Katherine Peters ◽  
Ashlee Loughan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Function ◽  
Stable Disease ◽  
Work Productivity ◽  
Daily Activities ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Activity Impairment ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Group 1

Abstract Information is limited on the impact of glioblastoma (GBM) on patient employment and caregiver time commitments. This observational multisite study evaluated the impact of GBM on patients’ employment and on caregivers’ ability to work and perform daily activities. A total of 180 adults diagnosed with GBM and their caregivers were stratified across 4 groups representing specific stages in the disease course: Group 1=newly diagnosed; 2=postradiation; 3=stable disease; 4=recurrence. We assessed the impact of GBM on employment status and self-reported cognitive function in patients (EORTC QLQ-C30) and in caregivers (Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire). Prior to diagnosis, 64% of all patients (74% < 65 years old) were employed, while only 22% (26% for those < 65 years old) were employed after diagnosis. Though not reaching significance, newly diagnosed patients and those with stable disease reported higher mean cognitive function scores (72.0 and 71.9) than other groups (61.1 and 61.3; P=0.227). At study enrollment, 56% of all caregivers were employed, while 41% had left their jobs to care for their patients. The impact on caregiver work productivity varied with a higher percentage of caregivers of newly diagnosed patients and those with recurrent disease missing work (45% and 24%, respectively) and experiencing work impairment (54% and 36%, respectively) than the other groups (P< 0.05). Forty-one percent of caregivers of newly diagnosed patients to 25% of patients with stable disease reported impairment of daily activities. GBM had a significant impact on patient and caregiver employment from the time of diagnosis. High cognitive burden among patients might have impacted their employment. Overall work and activity impairment for caregivers was evident in all groups with a notable impact at the time of first diagnosis and recurrence of disease. Future studies will explore the impact of these findings in a longitudinal cohort.

scholarly journals Health-related quality of life in Croatian general population and multiple myeloma patients assessed by the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-MY20 questionnaires

2019 ◽  
Vol 53 (3) ◽  
pp. 337-347 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sanja Ledinski Ficko ◽  
Vlatko Pejsa ◽  
Vesna Zadnik
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
General Population ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Eortc Qlq C30 ◽  
Health Related ◽  
Eortc Qlq ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background The impact of disease and treatment on the patient’s overall well-being and functioning is a topic of growing interest in clinical research and practice. The aim of this study is to obtain reference data on quality of life of Croatian general population. Further, we aim to assess the impact of the disease and its primary systemic treatment on their health related quality of life (HrQoL) in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Patients and methods Participants for the first part of the study were randomly selected from adult Croatian population. In the clinical part of the study MM patients were included as prospectively diagnosed within two years in two major Croatian haematological centres. The EORTC QLQ-C30 in both trials and QLQ-MY20 in MM patients only were applied for HrQoL assessment. Results Gender, age and place of residence have great impact on quality of life scores in Croatian population. The MM patients at the time of diagnosis have lower QLQ-C30 scores for global quality of life, functional and symptom scale scores, as well as single items. The type of disease followed by the choice of therapy options are important HrQoL determinants. Conclusions The norm values available now for Croatian population will help to interpret HrQoL for clinicians and aid in planning cancer care interventions. This study identified treatment effect consistent with those from other observational studies and provided new data on HrQoL across two different treatment choices for MM patients.

Impact of Renal Impairment (RI) on Outcomes after Treatment (Tx) with Lenalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone (Rd) in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) Patients (Pts): First Trial Results

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 2112-2112
Author(s):  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Matthew C Cheung ◽  
Murielle Roussel ◽  
Ting Liu ◽  
Barbara Gamberi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Renal Function ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Normal Renal Function ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Failure Time ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: Approximately 20–40% of pts with NDMM present with RI, which is associated with a negative impact on survival (Rajkumar, 2005). In the pivotal phase 3 FIRST trial (median follow-up 37 months [mos]), continuous Rd improved progression-free survival (PFS) vs. melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide (MPT) in elderly NDMM pts by 28% (25.5 vs. 20.7 mos; HR = 0.72; P < 0.01) (Facon, Blood 2013). Although 121 pts receiving continuous Rd are still on Tx, the interim overall survival (OS) analysis showed a 22% reduction in the risk of death in favor of continuous Rd vs. MPT (HR = 0.78; P = 0.02). The present analysis was conducted to determine the impact of RI on PFS, OS, and time to 2nd antimyeloma Tx (AMT) as clinical study outcomes. Methods: Pts were randomized to 3 Tx arms: continuous Rd until progression (n = 535); Rd for 18 cycles (72 weeks) (Rd18; n = 541); or MPT for 12 cycles (72 weeks) (n = 547). Enrolled NDMM pts were categorized according to their renal function: 24% had normal renal function (creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥ 80 mL/min), 44% presented with mild RI (≥ 50 and < 80 mL/min), 23% had moderate RI (≥ 30 and < 50 mL/min), and 9% had severe RI (< 30 mL/min). Pts requiring dialysis were excluded. Lenalidomide starting dose was 25 mg QD for pts with normal renal function or mild RI, 10 mg QD for moderate RI, and 15 mg QOD for severe RI. Melphalan dose was reduced by 50% in pts with moderate or severe RI. The primary endpoint was PFS (continuous Rd vs. MPT); secondary endpoints were OS, overall response rate, time to response, duration of response, time to Tx failure, time to 2nd AMT, health-related quality of life, safety, and improvement in renal function from baseline. Improvement in RI was defined as shifts from baseline to most extreme post-baseline value of the calculated CrCl as a measure of renal function during the active Tx (N = 1484). Results: A PFS benefit favored continuous Rd vs. MPT irrespective of the degree of renal function (Table 1): there was a benefit in pts with normal renal function (HR = 0.72 (0.51–1.02); P = 0.06), and better in pts with mild RI (HR = 0.79 (0.62–1.00); P = 0.05) and moderate RI (HR = 0.62 (0.45–0.85); P < 0.01). A PFS benefit was also seen with continuous Rd vs. Rd18 (a secondary comparison) in pts with mild RI and moderate RI (P < 0.01 for both). An interim OS benefit with continuous Rd vs. MPT was observed in most renal subgroups. Similar results were observed between Rd18 and MPT in terms of PFS or interim OS in any of the renal subgroups. Continuous Rd, compared with Rd18 or MPT, extended time to 2nd AMT in most renal groups except severe RI (CrCl < 30mL/min) (Table 2). Improvement in RI was observed more frequently in pts treated with continuous Rd than those with Rd18 or MPT: improvement of mild RI, 48%, 43%, and 48%, respectively; of moderate RI, 67% 61%, and 62%; and of severe RI, 64%, 59%, and 56%. Overall, < 5% of pts in any Tx group experienced a worsening in renal function status during Tx (continuous Rd 2.2%; Rd18 2.8%; MPT 2.7%). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) for these Txs were anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, deep-vein thrombosis/pulmonary embolism (DVT/PE), and peripheral sensory neuropathy (Table 3). Tx discontinuation due to AEs increased in pts with moderate and severe RI, regardless of the type of Tx (Table 3). Conclusions: PFS, OS (at interim analysis), and time to 2nd AMT outcomes generally improved continuous Rd vs. Rd18 or MPT in transplant-ineligible NDMM pts with normal renal function, and in those with mild or moderate RI. The small number of pts in the severe RI group precluded a meaningful conclusion. Continuous Rd was generally well tolerated and renal function improved in the majority of pts during Tx with continuous Rd vs. Rd18 or MPT. Disclosures Dimopoulos: Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria. Off Label Use: Lenalidomide used in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Roussel:Celgene: Consultancy, Lecture fees Other, Research Funding. van der Jagt:Celgene Corporation: Research Funding. Jaccard:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding. Tosikyan:Celgene: Consultancy. Karlin:Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bensinger:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding. Schots:Celgene: Research Funding. Chen:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Marek:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ervin-Haynes:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Facon:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals Subcutaneous Versus Intravenous Bortezomib in Two Different Induction Therapies for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma – Subgroup Analysis from the GMMG-MM5 Trial

Blood ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 124 (21) ◽  
pp. 3475-3475 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maximilian Merz ◽  
Hans Salwender ◽  
Mathias Hänel ◽  
Uta Bertsch ◽  
Christina Kunz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Induction Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Group Iv ◽  
Route Of Administration ◽  
Prolonged Treatment ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
The Impact

Abstract Background: In patients with relapsed multiple myeloma (MM), Moreau and colleagues (Lancet Oncol, 2011) demonstrated that subcutaneous (SC) administration of bortezomib (BTZ) significantly reduced rates of adverse events (AE) compared to the intravenous (IV) formulation without loss of efficacy. Prospective data on SC BTZ in newly diagnosed MM are limited. We investigated the impact of SC versus IV BTZ in two different induction therapies for patients with newly diagnosed MM treated within the multicenter, prospective randomized MM5 trial of the German Myeloma Multicenter Group (GMMG). Methods: From 06/2010 until 11/2013, 604 patients were randomly assigned to receive 3 cycles of PAd (BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, days 1, 4, 8 and 11; Doxorubicin 9 mg/m2 IV, days 1-4; Dexamethasone 20 mg/d, orally, days 1-4, 9-12 and 17-20) or 3 cycles VCD (BTZ 1.3 mg/m2, days 1, 4, 8 and 11; Cyclophosphamide 900 mg/m2IV; day 1, Dexamethasone 40 mg/d, orally, days 1-2, 4-5, 8-9 and 11-12) for induction therapy. In the MM5 trial, induction therapy is followed by stem cell mobilization and harvest, high-dose therapy and Lenalidomide-based consolidation/maintenance therapy. Primary end points of the ongoing study are response to treatment after induction therapy and progression-free survival. Due to improved AE profile of SC compared to IV BTZ reported by Moreau, the administration of BTZ was changed from IV to SC in 02/2012. Therefore, we were able to perform an explorative analysis of 598 patients who received at least one dose of trial medication (PAd: n=150 IV / 140 SC; VCD: n=154 IV / 140 SC). 14 patients were excluded from the analysis because administration of BTZ was changed after start of induction therapy. We analyzed whether the route of administration influenced the applied cumulative BTZ dose, toxicity and efficacy of PAd and VCD. Results: The cumulative applied BTZ dose was significantly higher in patients treated with SC BTZ (PAd: 28.9 mg; VCD: 28.8 mg) compared to IV-treated patients (PAd: 27.6 mg; VCD: 27.9 mg; p = 0.007). Analysis of reported AEs associated to induction therapy revealed a significantly higher rate in patients treated with IV BTZ (65.1%) compared to SC-treated patients (55.7%, p = 0.02). AE > °II were reported more frequently in the IV group (IV: 52.0%; SC: 43.9%, p = 0.004). In detail, abnormal laboratory findings including leucopenia and thrombocytopenia (IV: 23.0%; SC: 16.4%, p = 0.05), metabolism and nutrition disorders (IV: 12.5%; SC: 5.4%, p = 0.004) and gastrointestinal disorders (IV: 9.9%; SC: 3.9%, p = 0.006) occurred more often in IV-treated patients. Analysis of peripheral neuropathy (PN) ≥ °II revealed no significant differences between IV and SC BTZ during the first two cycles of induction therapy (cycle 1: IV: 1.6%; SC: 2.5%; cycle 2: IV: 2.3%; SC: 3.6%) but PN occurred more often in IV-treated patients during the third cycle of induction therapy compared to the SC group (IV: 7.6%; SC: 1.8%, p = 0.001). Overall response rates (partial response or better) were not influenced by the route of administration in patients treated with PAd (IV: 72.7%; SC: 70.7%; p = 0.79) or VCD (IV: 77.9%; SC: 82.1%; p = 0.39). Analysis of the VCD arm showed that rates of VGPR or better were significantly higher in patients treated with IV BTZ compared to SC-treated patients (IV: 41.6%; SC: 28.6%, p = 0.02). Rates of VGPR or better were also higher for IV-treated patients in the PAd arm but did not reach statistical significance (IV: 36.7%; SC: 31.4%, p=0.39). Patient characteristics including baseline creatinine levels > 2 mg/dl, obesity or age at inclusion > 65 years did not influence efficacy of IV or SC BTZ in both arms. Conclusion: Last year we reported on the favorable toxicity profile and equal efficacy of VCD compared to PAd. With the current analysis we demonstrate that toxicity is further reduced with SC BTZ compared to IV. We therefore recommend VCD as induction therapy. However, we show for the first time a possible loss of efficacy in SC-treated patients. Therefore it remains unclear whether the reduced toxicity justifies the general application of SC BTZ in newly diagnosed, transplant-eligible patients or whether a prolonged treatment (4 x VCD SC) may reduce toxicity while achieving similar efficacy. Further studies are warranted since our results are partially in contrast with the previously presented data in relapsed MM and the ongoing MM5 trial was initially not designed to prospectively investigate the effect of SC or IV BTZ. Disclosures Salwender: Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Binding site: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scheid:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Mai:Janssen: Travel support Other. Hose:Novartis: Research Funding. Schmidt-Wolf:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Weisel:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Onyx: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy; Noxxon: Consultancy. Duerig:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Goldschmidt:Janssen-Cilag: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Polyphor: Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Chugai: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Onyx: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Millenium: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau.

scholarly journals A Novel Approach to Risk Stratification in Multiple Myeloma Using ISS Stage and FISH

Blood ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 134 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. 1800-1800 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shaji K. Kumar ◽  
Patricia Greipp ◽  
Morie A Gertz ◽  
Angela Dispenzieri ◽  
Linda B Baughn ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Final Model ◽  
Survival Table ◽  
The Impact ◽  
1Q Gain

Background: A variety of risk factors have been described in multiple myeloma and current risk assessment incorporates ISS stage with specific FISH results and serum LDH (R-ISS). However, this model does not include all the current abnormalities described as prognostic for survival in multiple myeloma. Importantly, the impact of many of these high-risk abnormalities are not uniform. We examined if we can better integrate FISH results into a risk assessment tool to better predict the outcomes of newly diagnosed MM. Patients and methods: We studied a cohort of 1316 patients with FISH done within 6 months of diagnosis of MM, in whom results for commonly observed abnormalities were available. We specifically examined the individual impact of common translocations involving chromosome 14, MYC rearrangements, chromosome 1q gain (single or multiple duplication) and del13q/monosomy 13. A risk assessment system was developed, weighting each abnormality according to their Risk Ratio and integrating ISS stage and serum LDH into the final model construction. Overall survival was calculated from diagnosis, with those alive at last follow up being censored. Results: We first examined the impact of each of the above FISH abnormalities: 1) high risk translocations [t(4;14), t(14;16), or t(14,20)], 2) trisomies, 3) t(11;14), 4) MYCrearrangements, 5) del13q/monosomy 13, and 6) 1q gain . Each of the abnormalities, except for t(11;14), was prognostic for survival (Table 1 with the risk ratios). For 1q gain, the median OS was NR, 105 mos and 79 mos respectively for no abnormality, duplication of 1 copy and duplication of multiple copies, (p<0.001). On multivariate analysis, t(11;14) and trisomies were no longer prognostic for overall survival (Table 1). The cumulative impact of abnormalities demonstrated worsening survival in the presence of increasing numbers of abnormalities (Figure 1). Including ISS stage 3 and LDH > ULN as additional variables for prognostication indicated both were individually prognostic for OS. In a multivariate analysis, including these two and FISH abnormalities, 1q gain and LDH were not independently prognostic. The final model consisted of HR translocations, MYCrearrangements, del17p/monosomy 17, del13q/monosomy 13, and ISS stage 3. Each of these variables was weighted using their risk ratio and a composite score was developed using 998 patients for whom all variables were available (range: 0-7.9; median 1.8). Three patient groups were characterized: group 1 (0; 32%), group 2 (1-4; 58%) and group 3 (>4; 10%) with a median OS of 53 mos, 106 mos, and NR, respectively, p <0.001 (Figure 2). Conclusion: Using the most relevant FISH and laboratory factors, in a large cohort of patients, we refined the current system to develop a risk stratification system that predicts survival in patients with newly diagnosed MM treated with contemporary treatment regimens. This needs validation in future studies. Disclosures Kumar: Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding. Gertz:International Waldenstrom Foundation: Research Funding; Annexon: Consultancy; Medscape: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Amyloidosis Foundation: Research Funding; Abbvie: Other: personal fees for Data Safety Monitoring board; i3Health: Other: Development of educational programs and materials; Springer Publishing: Patents & Royalties; Physicians Education Resource: Consultancy; Pharmacyclics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Proclara: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Ionis/Akcea: Consultancy; Alnylam: Consultancy; Prothena Biosciences Inc: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Spectrum: Consultancy, Research Funding; Appellis: Consultancy; Research to Practice: Consultancy; Teva: Speakers Bureau; Johnson and Johnson: Speakers Bureau; DAVA oncology: Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy. Dispenzieri:Akcea: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Intellia: Consultancy; Pfizer: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Alnylam: Research Funding. Lacy:Celgene: Research Funding. Dingli:alexion: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Rigel: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding. Kapoor:Celgene: Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glaxo Smith Kline: Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Cellectar: Consultancy. Leung:Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Research Funding; Omeros: Research Funding; Aduro: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Bergsagel:Celgene: Consultancy; Ionis Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy.

scholarly journals Lenalidomide Compared to Ixazomib Maintenance in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Blood ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 138 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 3776-3776
Author(s):  
Eunice Lai ◽  
Yu Yang Soon ◽  
Ainsley Ryan Yan Bin Lee ◽  
Shi Yin Wong ◽  
Cinnie Yentia Soekojo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Proteasome Inhibitors ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Maintenance Strategies

Abstract Background Maintenance therapy is considered a standard of care in transplant eligible (TE) and non transplant eligible (NTE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). While immunomodulators (IMID) and proteasome inhibitors (PI) have been proposed as maintenance therapy options, there are no randomised trials (RCTs) directly comparing these agents in the maintenance setting. The IMID lenalidomide (Len) and the PI ixazomib (Ixa) have been compared against placebo as maintenance strategies in NDMM. We present a network meta-analysis (NMA) of RCTs comparing the efficacy and safety of Len and Ixa maintenance therapies in NDMM. Methods We searched various biomedical databases for eligible studies evaluating Len or Ixa against placebo/ observation as maintenance therapy in patients with NDMM from date of inception through November 2020. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes include overall survival (OS) and adverse events (AE). The Cochrane risk of bias tool version 2.0 was used to assess trial quality. A Bayesian NMA model was used to assess the relative effects of competing treatments on PFS and OS outcomes. Adverse events were assessed using the synthesis without meta-analysis (SWIM) approach due to variability in the toxicity scoring criteria. The GRADE approach was used to rate the certainty of the evidence. This study is registered with PROSPERO, CRD42021226157. Results We identified eight studies including 3229 transplant eligible (TE) and 1689 non transplant eligible (NTE) patients. All studies were judged to have low risk of bias. Len but not Ixa was associated with statistically significant improvement in PFS when compared to placebo in TE (Len: Hazard Ratio (HR) 0.46, 95% Credible Interval (CrI) 0.35-0.56, high certainty; Ixa: HR 0.72, 95% CrI 0.46-1.13, moderate certainty) and NTE (Len: HR 0.46, 95% CrI 0.29-0.75, high certainty; Ixa: HR 0.69, 95% CrI 0.43-1.18, moderate certainty). Bayesian modelling demonstrated a 97% and 93% probability that Len resulted in superior PFS compared to Ixa in TE and NTE patients respectively. Both Len and Ixa were not associated with statistically significant improvement in OS compared to placebo in TE and NTE patients. There was no significant effect modification on the effect of Len vs placebo and Ixa vs placebo by cytogenetics status, use of proteasome inhibitors for induction or duration of maintenance therapies for PFS and/or OS outcomes. Len were judged to have a higher incidence of second malignancies and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia than Ixa while Ixa was judged to have a higher incidence of thrombocytopenia than Len. Conclusions Maintenance therapy with Len may provide a larger PFS benefit than Ixa regardless of type of induction therapy and cytogenetic risk in patients with NDDM. The differing toxicity profile of these agents is also an important consideration for treatment decisions. RCTs directly comparing these maintenance strategies are warranted. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Ooi: Jansen: Honoraria; Teva Pharmaceuticals: Honoraria; GSK: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Chng: Sanofi: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; BMS/Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Johnson and Johnson: Honoraria, Research Funding; Pfizer: Honoraria.

scholarly journals Outcomes of Patients with Multiple Myeloma Harboring Gain/Amplification 1q in the Era of Modern Therapy

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 45-46
Author(s):  
Xiao Hu ◽  
Cherng-Horng Wu ◽  
Janet Cowan ◽  
Raymond L. Comenzo ◽  
Cindy Varga
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Survival Data ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
The United States ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Rank Tests ◽  
Treatment Regimens ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Log Rank Tests

Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is the second most common hematological malignancy in the United States. Fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) is a popular tool to detect cytogenetic alterations which in turn, can contribute to the risk stratification of patients with MM. Gain or amplification of CKS1B gene at chromosome 1q21 region (gain 1q) is detected in 35-40% of newly diagnosed MM cases, and has been reported to be associated with inferior prognostic outcomes. It also frequently occurs with the deletion of CDKN2C at chromosome 1p32.3 (del 1p). There is a distinct lack of data on patients harboring this cytogenetic alteration in the era of novel agents. We sought to look at outcomes of this patient population at a single institution over the last 5 years. Methods: This retrospective study included all patients with MM as defined by the International Myeloma Working Group (IMWG) with available FISH studies identifying gain 1q between 01/01/2015 to 04/30/2020 at Tufts Medical Center. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board. Baseline demography, disease characteristics, and treatment history were extracted from the electronic medical records. With death as primary event, overall survival (OS) was defined as the survival time from the discovery of gain 1q to death. Progression free survival (PFS) was defined as the time from discovery of gain 1q to first progression/relapse or death, whichever occurred first. Kaplan-Meier method was used to estimate survival data. Differences in survival between two groups were analyzed by log-rank tests. Multivariable cox regression adjusting for baseline characteristics and significant concurrent cytogenetic alterations were performed to explore the impact of treatment regimens on survival. Results: Of the forty-nine subjects included in this study, the age range was 39 to 85 years; 31 patients (63.3%) were over the age of 65 years, and 28 (57.1%) were male. Twenty-eight (57.1%) subjects with gain 1q were newly diagnosed while the remaining 21 (42.9%) were identified at relapse. Gain 1q was present in more than 20% of clonal cells in 73.5% of subjects and 29.6% had del 1p as well. Patients with gain 1q were more likely to have deletion 13q (65.3%) and hyperdiploidy (61.2%). Regarding treatment, 75.7% of patients received bortezomib, 70.3% received lenalidomide, 38.9% underwent autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) and 64.9% received daratumumab. At the time of analysis, 41 patients were still alive. For the entire cohort, the estimated median OS was not reached (NR) (95% confidence interval [CI], 24.1-NR), and the estimated median PFS was 15.27 months (95% CI, 4.77-NR). In log-rank tests, presence of extra medullary disease was associated with shorter PFS (4.8 vs 24.1 months, P=0.003), while IGH abnormalities including complex IGH rearrangements or losses were associated with longer PFS (NR vs 8.2 months, P=0.046). Lenalidomide-based treatment was associated with prolonged OS (NR vs 17.2 months, P=0.048). Bortezomib-based therapy and upfront ASCT were associated with improved PFS (15.3 vs 4.7 months, P=0.036; NR vs 4.8 months, P =0.019 respectively). Further multivariate analyses adjusting for age, number of CKS1B copies, International Staging System stage, baseline creatinine, clone size, del 1p, lactate dehydrogenase, extra medullary disease, and IGH abnormalities revealed that administration of daratumumab after the discovery of gain 1q was associated with superior OS (Hazard Ratio [HR]=0.023x10^-2, 95% CI [0.002x10^-4, 0.299], P =0.022) compared with those not receiving this agent; both the use of bortezomib (HR=0.210, 95% CI [0.064, 0.687], P =0.010) and daratumumab (HR=0.126, 95% CI [0.015, 1.036], P =0.054) were associated with prolonged PFS. The use of lenalidomide or upfront ASCT lost prognostic benefit after adjusting for additional variables in multivariate models. Conclusions: The outcomes of MM patients with gain 1q were evaluated according to clinical characteristics, concurrent chromosomal alterations and treatment regimens. In our small cohort, daratumumab and daratumumab-bortezomib combination regimens were found to have a favorable impact on survival. Future prospective clinical trials with larger sample sizes are warranted to confirm the results and further improve the outcomes of MM patients with this cytogenetic alteration. Disclosures Comenzo: Amgen: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sanofi: Consultancy; Unum: Consultancy; Caleum: Consultancy; Prothena: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document