Health related quality of life for multiple myeloma patients according to treatment strategy after autologous stem cell transplant: a cross-sectional study using EORTC, EQ-5D and MY-20 scales

Health-Related Quality of Life in Multiple Myeloma Patients Treated with High- or Low-Dose Lenalidomide Maintenance Therapy after Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation-Results from the LenaMain Trial (NCT00891384)

INTRODUCTION

The LenaMain trial (NCT00891384) reported increased progression-free survival with 25 mg of lenalidomide maintenance compared to 5 mg. Here, we report the patient-reported outcomes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Scores obtained from the EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire C30 were analyzed for longitudinal changes from baseline within the groups as well as cross-sectional scores.

RESULTS

Compliance rates were high, with 95.7% at baseline and 70% during maintenance. At study entry, scores were high for functioning and low for symptoms. During maintenance, the median global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) was constant, without significant differences over time (median GHS/QoL: 68 at baseline and 58 for Len high and 68 for Len low at 2 years) and between treatment arms (mean change < 2). Similarly, most functional scale domains were constant. Notably, diarrhea increased consistently for both treatment arms (baseline: -1.905 (range: -5.78-1.97); end of year 2: 16.071 (range: 5.72-26.42); p < 0.05). The subgroup analysis showed that neither disease activity, duration of treatment, nor adverse events affected the health-related quality of life (HR-QoL) or utility.

CONCLUSION

High baseline scores were maintained throughout the trial without significant differences between the Len dosages, which supports continuous treatment with a dose tailored to patients' HR-QoL.

Multiple Myeloma: Impact of Time to Transplant on the Outcome

BACKGROUND

Autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) is a standard therapy for transplant eligible patients of multiple myeloma (MM). To evaluate impact of time to transplant on subsequent outcomes, we analyzed data on consecutive MM patients who received novel agents-based induction prior to transplant.

METHODS

Between 2006 and 2019, 363 MM patients underwent ASCT. Patients' median age was 52 years, ranging from 20 to 72 years, 233 (64.2%) were males. Median interval from diagnosis to transplant was 11.5 months (range, 4-67.5); 201 (55.4%) patients underwent ASCT within 12 months (early) and 162 (44.6%) beyond 12 months since diagnosis (delayed ASCT). Primary objective was progression-free survival. Secondary objectives were-response rate to transplant, overall survival (OS), and transplant-related mortality (TRM).

RESULTS

Post-ASCT complete response (CR) (77.1% vs. 64.8%; P < .025) and CR+ very good partial response rate (89% vs. 81.5%; P < .03) was higher for early ASCT cohort. Engraftment characteristics, regimen-related toxicities, and day +100 TRM (3.5% vs 3.7%; P = .564) were similar in 2 cohorts. Median OS for early versus late cohort from date of diagnosis is 127.0 (95% CI, 98.9-155.1) versus 104.5 months (95% CI, 79.3-129.6; P = .356) and from date of transplant is 119.0 (95% CI, 93.4-144.6) versus 89.5 months (95% CI, 57.4-121.6), P < .02. Median PFS is better for early transplant cohort; 69.5 (95% CI, 56.7-82.3) versus 50.0 months (95% CI, 35.6-64.4), P < .05, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Early transplant for myeloma is associated with higher response rate and better progression-free survival.

Management of patients with multiple myeloma beyond the clinical-trial setting: understanding the balance between efficacy, safety and tolerability, and quality of life

Treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM) are increasing with the introduction of complex multi-novel-agent-based regimens investigated in randomized clinical trials. However, application in the real-world setting, including feasibility of and adherence to these regimens, may be limited due to varying patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors. Furthermore, approximately 40% of real-world MM patients do not meet the criteria for phase 3 studies on which approvals are based, resulting in a lack of representative phase 3 data for these patients. Therefore, treatment decisions must be tailored based on additional considerations beyond clinical trial efficacy and safety, such as treatment feasibility (including frequency of clinic/hospital attendance), tolerability, effects on quality of life (QoL), and impact of comorbidities. There are multiple factors of importance to real-world MM patients, including disease symptoms, treatment burden and toxicities, ability to participate in daily activities, financial burden, access to treatment and treatment centers, and convenience of treatment. All of these factors are drivers of QoL and treatment satisfaction/compliance. Importantly, given the heterogeneity of MM, individual patients may have different perspectives regarding the most relevant considerations and goals of their treatment. Patient perspectives/goals may also change as they move through their treatment course. Thus, the 'efficacy' of treatment means different things to different patients, and treatment decision-making in the context of personalized medicine must be guided by an individual's composite definition of what constitutes the best treatment choice. This review summarizes the various factors of importance and practical issues that must be considered when determining real-world treatment choices. It assesses the current instruments, methodologies, and recent initiatives for analyzing the MM patient experience. Finally, it suggests options for enhancing data collection on patients and treatments to provide a more holistic definition of the effectiveness of a regimen in the real-world setting.

Quality of life outcomes in multiple myeloma patients: a summary of recent clinical trials

Introduction: Management of multiple myeloma (MM) has improved over recent years. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) data is becoming increasingly important, owing to improved survival outcomes. Areas covered: The authors performed an expert review of the literature to identify evidence-based data available on HRQoL in frontline and relapsed/refractory MM (RRMM) patients. Expert opinion: De-novo patients should be informed that the HRQoL is expected to improve during first-line treatment with different degrees of possible deterioration during the first cycles. Achievement of a maximal response should be strongly considered, particularly in the frontline setting, but must also be balanced with tolerability, HRQoL, and patient preferences. The same degree of improvement in HRQoL cannot be expected during conventional relapse treatments, where patients should be prepared only for stabilization of HRQoL. However, focusing attention only on measures such as toxicity may provide just a partial view of overall treatment effectiveness. Nonetheless, the authors believe the added value of taking into consideration the patient's perspectives and the importance of patient-reported outcomes in the evaluation of treatment effects should be considered mandatory. The incorporation of quality of life assessment into clinical and research practice has the potential of improving treatment outcomes.