Patient-Reported Factors in Treatment Satisfaction in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

The EASEMENT study: A multicentre, observational, cross-sectional study to evaluate patient preferences, treatment satisfaction, quality of life, and healthcare resource use in patients with multiple myeloma receiving injectable-containing or fully oral therapies

OBJECTIVE

As multiple myeloma (MM) therapies advance, understanding patients', caregivers', and physicians' perspectives on, and satisfaction with, available treatment options and their impact on quality of life (QoL), is important.

METHODS

EASEMENT is a real-world, observational, cross-sectional study conducted in 19 sites within the UK, Canada, and Italy using retrospective chart reviews and surveys. Enrolled patients had clinical history available since diagnosis and had received ≥1 cycle of their current line of therapy. Primary objectives were to describe patient/caregiver QoL (EQ-5D-5L questionnaire), patient preference for oral/injectable therapies (single discrete-choice question), and patient satisfaction (TSQM-9 questionnaire).

RESULTS

Between October 2018 and March 2020, 399 patients were enrolled (n = 192 newly diagnosed multiple myeloma [NDMM], n = 206 relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma [RRMM], n = 1 missing). Among NDMM and RRMM patients, 78%/22% and 42%/58% were receiving injectables/orals, respectively. Both NDMM and RRMM patients significantly preferred orals versus injectables (p < .0001). No significant differences were reported in treatment satisfaction or QoL, but treatment convenience favoured orals over injectables with near significance (p = .053).

CONCLUSION

MM patients perceived greater convenience and preference for orals versus injectables. Oral treatments are useful for patients who cannot or prefer not to travel to clinics, or cannot perform self-injection within the community.

Financial Toxicity, Time Toxicity, and Quality of Life in Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND

Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) may be on therapy for years, which can lead to financial toxicity (FinTox) or time toxicity (TimeTox). The prevalence, predictors, and quality of life (QOL) impacts of FinTox and TimeTox during different phases of MM treatment have not been characterized.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a single-center cross-sectional survey of patients with MM who had undergone transplantation. FinTox+ was defined as a COST-FACIT score <23, TimeTox+ as MM-related interactions (including phone calls) ≥1x weekly or ≥1x monthly in-person among far-residing patients, QOL using PROMIS Global Health, and functional status using patient-reported Karnofsky performance status (KPS).

RESULTS

Of 252 patients, 22% and 40% met FinTox+ and TimeTox+ criteria respectively. Respective FinTox+ and TimeTox+ proportions were 22%/37% for patients on maintenance, 22%/82% with active therapy, and 20%/14% with observation. FinTox+ predictors included annual income (P < .01) and out-of-pocket costs (P < .01). TimeTox+ predictors included disease status (P < .001), caregiver status (P = .01), far-residing status (P < .001), and out-of-pocket costs (P = .03). FinTox+ was associated with a clinically meaningful decrease in mental QOL, while TimeTox+ patients were more likely to have KPS ≤ 80.

CONCLUSIONS

In our large study, monetary status but not disease status predicted FinTox. Over a third of patients on maintenance reported TimeTox. FinTox+ was associated with decreased mental health, while TimeTox+ was associated with worse performance status. These two toxicities may negatively impact patient wellbeing, and studies of strategies to mitigate their impact are in development.

In-class transition from bortezomib-based therapy to IRd is an effective approach in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma

Aim: To compare the effectiveness of in-class transition to all-oral ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) following parenteral bortezomib (V)-based induction versus continued V-based therapy in US oncology clinics. Patients & methods: Non-transplant eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) receiving in-class transition to IRd (N = 100; US MM-6), or V-based therapy (N = 111; INSIGHT MM). Results: Following inverse probability of treatment weighting, overall response rate was 73.2% with IRd versus 57.5% with V-based therapy (p < 0.0001). Median duration of treatment was 10.8 versus 5.3 months (p < 0.0001). Overall, 18/24% of patients discontinued IRd/V-based therapy due to adverse events. Conclusion: IRd after V-based induction was associated with significantly improved overall response rate and duration of treatment than continued V-based combination therapy. Clinical Trial Registration: US MM-6: NCT03173092; INSIGHT MM: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Patient-reported experiences during and following treatment with belantamab mafodotin for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in the DREAMM-2 study

Introduction

Patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) are likely to be living with persistent symptoms, especially bone pain and fatigue, and experiencing restrictions in their physical and social functioning, which reduce health-related quality of life.

Methods

This qualitative interview study evaluated patients' perspectives about living with RRMM and their treatment with belantamab mafodotin, using interviews embedded in the Phase II DREAMM-2 trial (NCT03525678) with belantamab mafodotin. Patients consented to participate in up to 2 recorded telephone interviews (at treatment cycle 4 [C4] and at end of treatment [EOT]) comprising open-ended questions.

Results

A total of 142 interviews were conducted with 111 unique patients. At C4, common symptoms included neuropathy, fatigue, and bone or joint pain. Improvements in symptom severity were reported by patients who responded to belantamab mafodotin. Symptoms associated with visual impairment, eye irritation, and eye pain reported during the trial were reported to be at- or near-resolution by the EOT interview. Regarding impacts of underlying MM, patients most commonly expressed concerns about changes in daily performance and lifestyle for both responders (67.5% of all impact expressions) and non-responders (63.2%). Overall, interview participants reported being satisfied with belantamab mafodotin treatment.

Discussion

This qualitative patient interview study provides valuable insight into patients' symptomatic experience with belantamab mafodotin for their RRMM treatment and may help healthcare providers better anticipate their patients' real-world experience and needs when prescribing this novel agent in the clinic.

Duration of frontline therapy and impact on clinical outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients not receiving frontline stem cell transplant

BACKGROUND

Extended first-line therapy (1LT) has improved clinical outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). This retrospective study of NDMM patients evaluated the relationship between dose-attenuation of 1LT and duration of therapy (DOT) and DOT on outcomes.

METHODS

Adults with NDMM not undergoing stem cell transplant (SCT) from January 1, 2012 toMarch 31, 2018 from the Integrated Oncology Network were included; 300 were randomly selected for chart review. 1LT DOT, time to next treatment (TTNT), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were estimated using Kaplan-Meier analysis. Marginal structural models evaluated relationships between DOT and TTNT, PFS, and OS at 2 years accounting for confounders and survival bias from the time-dependent nature of DOT.

RESULTS

Of 300 chart-reviewed patients, 93 were excluded for incomplete data or meeting exclusion criteria. Among 207 NDMM patients, median age was 74 years; 146 (70.5%) did not receive dose-attenuation during 1LT. Patients with short DOT were older, frailer, with a higher comorbidity burden, and a significantly lower proportion had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS = 0. As DOT increased, more patients underwent dose-attenuation (p < 0.0001). The median 1LT DOT was 20.9 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 13.9, 26.4) versus 4.2 months (95% CI: 3.2, 4.9) for patients receiving versus not receiving dose-attenuation, respectively (p < 0.0001). After accounting for survival bias, confounder-adjusted TTNT was prolonged with each additional month of 1LT (odds ratio [OR]: 0.76 [95% CI: 0.75, 0.78]); likelihoods of risks of disease progression (OR: 0.87 [95% CI: 0.86, 0.88]) and death at 2 years (OR: 0.72 [95% CI: 0.70, 0.74]) were reduced with each month of 1LT (p < 0.0001 for all outcomes).

CONCLUSIONS

Dose-attenuated 1LT was associated with longer DOT among patients with non-SCT NDMM. Each additional month of 1LT was associated with a reduced adjusted likelihood of disease progression and death at 2 years. Dose-attenuation of 1LT can extend DOT; longer DOT may improve clinical outcomes.

No needles needed: All-oral therapy options for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma

Immense progress has been made for the treatment of multiple myeloma over the past two decades, with patient outcomes improving dramatically as a result. Patient quality of life, however, is constantly challenged by complications of the disease, side effects of therapy and the overall burden receiving continuous treatment. Compared to parenteral agents, all-oral regimens can provide logistically favorable alternatives and are associated with improved quality of life. Here, we review the currently available and investigational oral therapies for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma and provide a practical clinical reference tool. We explore the factors that dictate the selection of therapy, such as prior drug refractoriness, disease biology and patient-specific considerations. Regimens with their respective supporting clinical data are organized by the degree of prior treatment, from lenalidomide-sensitive to heavily pretreated patients. We explore common challenges such as renal insufficiency and cytopenias. Lastly, we review investigational oral agents.

Real World Adherence to and Persistence With Oral Oncolytics in Multiple Myeloma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Oral oncolytic treatments (OOTs) have improved the prognosis of patients with multiple myeloma (MM). However, the effectiveness of these therapies is undermined by poor adherence. We aimed to characterize the real-world adherence to, and persistence with, OOTs for MM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the International Pharmaceutical abstracts databases were searched for relevant observational studies published in English up to November 21, 2021. This was supplemented by manual searches of abstracts from the annual meetings of the American Society of Hematology, the American Society for Clinical Oncology, and the European Hematology Association as well as screening the references of included articles. Random-effects meta-analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Following screening of 11,557 articles, 19 studies involving 27,129 patients in 8 countries (France, the US, Germany, Italy, the UK, Brazil, South Korea, and Belgium) prescribed OOTs (lenalidomide, thalidomide, pomalidomide, panobinostat, ixazomib, and melphalan) for MM were included. The overall pooled proportion of adherent patients was 67.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 57.1%-77.8%). The pooled proportion of adherent patients was higher in self-reported questionnaire-based studies compared to those using prescription/dispensing data (81.6% vs. 61.0%; P-value for difference = .08). Across 5 studies involving 15,363 patients, a pooled proportion of 35.8% (95% CI: 22.0-50.9) discontinued treatment. Factors reported to be associated with nonadherence included increasing age, higher comorbidity, polypharmacy, and a lack of social support.

CONCLUSION

In patients with MM, adherence to and persistence with OOTs remains suboptimal. To achieve desired clinical outcomes, interventions to improve adherence and minimize discontinuation may be warranted.

Characterizing the Patient Journey in Multiple Myeloma: A Patient Perspective (Preprint)

Background

The patient experience of multiple myeloma (MM) is multifaceted and varies substantially between individuals. Current published information on the patient perspective and treatment of MM is limited, making it difficult to gain insights into patient needs regarding the condition.

Objective

In this review, a combined research method approach (ie, the review of published literature and social media posts) was undertaken to provide insight into patients’ perspectives on the burden and treatment of MM, the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, and the impact of MM on caregivers of patients with MM.

Methods

Targeted searches of PubMed and PsycINFO were conducted from November 16, 2010, to November 16, 2020; in parallel, patient-reported information derived from social media posts from 6 patient advocacy websites and YouTube were searched. The review of patient advocacy websites and YouTube targeted patient-reported information from patients with a self-reported diagnosis of MM who discussed their experience of MM and its treatments.

Results

A total of 27 articles and 138 posts were included (patient-reported information included data from 76 individuals), and results from both sources showed that patients experienced a variety of symptoms and treatment side effects, including neuropathy, fatigue, nausea, and back pain. These can affect areas of health-related quality of life (HRQOL), including physical functioning; emotional, psychological, and social well-being; the ability to work; and relationships. Patients valued involvement in treatment decision-making, and both the patient-reported information and the literature indicated that efficacy and tolerability strongly influence treatment decision-making. For patients, caregivers, and physicians, the preference for treatments was strongest when associated with increased survival. Caregivers can struggle to balance care responsibilities and jobs, and their HRQOL is affected in several areas, including emotional-, role-, social-, and work-related aspects of life. The COVID-19 pandemic has challenged patients’ ability to manage MM because of limited hospital access and restrictions that negatively affected their lives, psychological well-being, and HRQOL. Unmet patient needs identified in the literature and patient-reported information were for more productive appointments with health care professionals, better-tolerated therapies, and more support for themselves and their caregivers.

Conclusions

The combination of published literature and patient-reported information provides valuable and rich details on patient experiences and perceptions of MM and its treatment. The data highlighted that patients’ HRQOL is impeded not only by the disease but also by treatment-related side effects. Patients in the literature and patient-reported information showed a strong preference for treatments that prolong life, and patients appeared to value participation in treatment decisions. However, there remain unmet needs and areas for further research, including treatment, caregiver burden, and how to conduct appointments with health care professionals. This may help improve the understanding of the journey of patients with MM.

Plain Language Summary

Multiple Myeloma (MM) is the second most common cancer that affects blood cells. In this study, researchers wanted to know patients’ views on the effects of MM and the treatments they received. Researchers also looked at the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on patients’ treatment and the impact of MM on caregivers. To this end, the researchers reviewed information from 27 published studies and 138 social media posts by 76 patients with MM. Patients commonly reported nerve pain, tiredness, feeling sick, and back pain caused by MM and the treatments they received. The effects of MM and treatments affected patients’ physical function; emotional, psychological, and social well-being; ability to work; and relationships. The researchers found that patients wanted to be involved in decisions related to their treatment. The effectiveness against MM and known negative effects strongly influenced the choice of treatments for patients. Increased survival was the strongest factor in the choice of treatment for patients, caregivers, and doctors. Researchers found that the emotional-, role-, social-, and work-related aspects of caregivers’ lives were affected by caring for patients with MM. The COVID-19 pandemic also affected the ability of patients to manage their MM because of limited hospital access and the effects of restrictions that impacted their lives and psychological well-being. Finally, the researchers identified some areas requiring improvement, including unproductive appointments with health care professionals, the need for treatments with fewer negative effects, and more support for patients with MM and their caregivers. This information may be useful to improve and understand the experience of patients with MM.

Patient perspectives on symptoms, health-related quality of life, and treatment experience associated with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Purpose

This study aimed to better understand the patient perspective and treatment experience of relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).

Methods

This qualitative study enrolled adult RRMM patients from 6 US clinics who had ≥ 3 months of life expectancy, ≤ 6 prior lines of therapy, and ≥ 1 treatment regimen with a proteasome inhibitor and immunomodulator, or a CD38 monoclonal antibody or an alkylating agent, and a steroid. In-person semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted to capture concepts that were relevant and important to patients. Topics included RRMM symptoms and impacts and the mode of administration, frequency, duration, convenience, side effects, and overall experience with RRMM treatment.

Results

A total of 22 patients completed interviews. At enrollment, 59.1% of participants were using regimens containing dexamethasone, 36.4% daratumumab, 27.3% carfilzomib, and 18.2% lenalidomide. More participants had experience using intravenous or injectable therapy alone (40.9%) than oral therapy alone (18.2%). Back pain and fatigue were the most frequently reported symptoms (40.9% each); 27.3% reported no symptoms. Most participants reported physical function limitations (86.4%), emotional impacts (77.3%), MM-related activity limitations (72.7%), and sleep disturbances (63.6%). Most participants perceived treatment effectiveness based on physician-explained clinical signs (68.2%) and symptom relief (40.9%). Participants experienced gastrointestinal adverse events (59.1%), fatigue (59.1%), sleep disturbances (31.8%), and allergic reactions (31.8%) with treatment. Key elements of treatment burden included the duration of a typical treatment day (68.2%), treatment interfering with daily activities (54.5%), and infusion duration (50.0%).

Conclusions

These results provide treatment experience–related data to further understand RRMM treatment burden and better inform treatment decision-making.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00520-022-06979-7.

Oral ixazomib-dexamethasone vs oral pomalidomide-dexamethasone for lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed multiple myeloma: a randomized Phase 2 trial

Multiple myeloma (MM) patients typically receive several lines of combination therapy and first-line treatment commonly includes lenalidomide. As patients age, they become less tolerant to treatment, requiring convenient/tolerable/lenalidomide-free options. Carfilzomib and/or bortezomib-exposed/intolerant, lenalidomide-refractory MM patients with ≥2 prior lines of therapy were randomized 3:2 to ixazomib-dexamethasone (ixa-dex) (n = 73) or pomalidomide-dexamethasone (pom-dex) (n = 49) until progression/toxicity. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.1 vs 4.8 months with ixa-dex vs pom-dex (HR 0.847, 95% CI 0.535-1.341, P = 0.477; median follow-up: 15.3 vs 17.3 months); there was no statistically significant difference between arms. In patients with 2 and ≥3 prior lines of therapy, respectively, mPFS was 11.0 vs 5.7 months (HR 1.083, 95% CI 0.547-2.144) and 5.7 vs 3.7 months (HR 0.686, 95% CI 0.368-1.279). Among ixa-dex vs pom-dex patients, 69% vs 81% had Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), 51% vs 53% had serious TEAEs, 39% vs 36% had TEAEs leading to drug discontinuation, 44% vs 32% had TEAEs leading to dose reduction, and 13% vs 13% died on study. Quality of life was similar between arms and maintained during treatment. Ixa-dex represents an important lenalidomide-free, oral option for this heavily pretreated, lenalidomide-refractory, proteasome inhibitor-exposed population.Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03170882.

Preferences and Priorities for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma Treatments Among Patients and Caregivers in the United States

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND

This study aimed to describe patient and caregiver preferences for treatments of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (MM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A survey including discrete-choice experiment (DCE) and best-worst scaling (BWS) exercises was conducted among US patients with relapsed or refractory MM and their caregivers. The DCE included six attributes with varying levels including progression-free survival (PFS), toxicity, and mode and frequency of administration. In addition, the impact of treatment cost was assessed using a fixed-choice question. The BWS exercise included 18 items (modes and frequency of administration, additional treatment convenience, and toxicity items). The survey was administered online to patients recruited from the Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation CoMMpass study (NCT01454297).

RESULTS

The final samples consisted of 94 patients and 32 caregivers. Avoiding severe nerve damage was most important to patients, followed by longer PFS. Caregivers considered PFS to be the most important attribute. We estimate that a third or more of patients were cost-sensitive, meaning their treatment preference was altered based on cost implications. Caregivers were not cost-sensitive. The three most bothersome treatment features in the BWS exercise were risk of kidney failure, lowering white blood cell counts, and weakening the immune system.

CONCLUSION

Patients with relapsed or refractory MM and their caregivers consider many factors including efficacy, toxicity, mode/frequency of administration, and cost in their decisions regarding treatment options. The study provides a basis for future Research on patient and caregiver treatment preferences, which could be incorporated into shared decision-making with physicians.

Digital Health for Patients With Multiple Myeloma: An Unmet Need

Multiple myeloma (MM) is associated with the highest symptom burden and lowest health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with hematologic malignancies. HRQoL in MM is heterogeneous, varying over the course of disease, with the highest burden at diagnosis and relapse. Patients with MM are increasingly being treated with oral maintenance medications at home. As a result, longitudinal monitoring of medication adherence and patient-reported outcomes, including HRQoL, could inform on disease status, therapeutic tolerability, and satisfaction with care. Digital health technologies, including telemedicine, mobile health, and wearable devices, are poised to become an integral part of modern health care, in part due to the surge in telemedicine necessitated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the literature has many reports on the use of digital health technologies in other types of cancers, fewer studies report on their application to MM. In the current narrative review, we survey the applications of digital health for MM. Although there is evidence that some are associated with improved health outcomes, challenges exist that must be met to ensure more widespread adoption. These include the need for increased awareness by patients and health care providers, lack of access by the typical older patient with MM, absence of randomized clinical trials, and low integration with current workflows such as electronic health records. Following our summary of technologies that could benefit patients with MM, we end by describing our vision for how they can be integrated into each phase of the patient journey.

Cost Effectiveness of Triplet Selinexor-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone (XVd) in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma (MM) Based on Results from the Phase III BOSTON Trial

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Nearly all patients with multiple myeloma undergo multiple rounds of therapy. The phase III BOSTON trial of once-weekly selinexor and once-weekly bortezomib with dexamethasone (XVd) vs twice-weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) is the basis for this cost-effectiveness analysis in previously treated multiple myeloma from a US commercial payer perspective over a lifetime horizon.

METHODS

A partitioned survival model enabled use of direct overall survival and progression-free survival curves from BOSTON to generate four health states for XVd and Vd: progression-free survival on treatment, progression-free survival off treatment, post-progression, and mortality. Using a 1-week cycle length, benefits and costs were discounted at 3.0% annually. Additional comparators were included in an exploratory analysis that compared XVd against seven additional regimens (six triplets, one doublet).

RESULTS

After considering costs, utility, progression, and survival, the base-case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of XVd vs Vd was $475,430/quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). The 50% cost-effectiveness probability midpoint was near $470,000/QALY, based on a probabilistic sensitivity analysis. The robustness of the analysis was supported by additional scenario assessment and deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses, which generally demonstrated little variance, with greatest sensitivity to variations in discount rates and utility values. In an exploratory analysis against external comparators, XVd showed a higher QALY gain with a lower cost (i.e., dominance) compared with lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd), pomalidomide/bortezomib/dexamethasone (PVd), and carfilzomib/pomalidomide/dexamethasone (KPd).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of XVd to the previously treated multiple myeloma treatment landscape provides a novel oral treatment option, which, when compared to Vd in the base-case analysis resulted in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $475,430/QALY. Exploratory analyses comparing against external comparators suggest that XVd was dominant vs Rd, PVd, and KPd.

Access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

INTRODUCTION

Geographic access to novel oncology therapies, and the extent to which it may vary by potential sites of care, regions, and population characteristics, is poorly understood. We examined how expanding access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy administration sites impacts patient travel distances and time.

METHODS

We used geographic information system techniques to calculate shortest travel distance and time between patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and the nearest CAR T cell therapy administration site in three scenarios: academic hospitals; academic and community multispecialty hospitals; and academic and community multispecialty hospitals plus nonacademic specialty oncology network centers. Main outcome measures were differences in travel distance and time among the scenarios and the relationship between travel time and socioeconomic status, race, rural-urban areas, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma clusters. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma incidence, socioeconomic status, and administration centers were derived from governmental/publicly available data sources.

RESULTS

Of 3922 patients eligible for CAR T cell therapy, more than 37% had to travel more than 1 h to the nearest academic hospital. Average travel time and distance were significantly reduced by 23% and 30% (P < 0.001), respectively, when access was expanded to include community hospitals plus a broader range of oncology specialty treatment centers. Compared to academic hospitals alone, increasing access to include community hospitals decreased time and distance by 7% and 8% (P < 0.01), respectively. In addition, there would be a lower proportion of sites operating as the only care provider within 25 miles if access was expanded outside of academic hospitals only. Longer travel time was associated with lower socioeconomic status.

CONCLUSION

Many patients with DLBCL have long travel times to an academic hospital that administers CAR T cell therapy. Expanding access to care through site-of-care planning will help address regional, rural-urban, and sociodemographic equity in the geographic allocation of CAR T cell therapy.

Network Meta-Analysis of Once Weekly Selinexor-Bortezomib-Dexamethasone in Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

Background: Despite the availability of new treatments, multiple myeloma (MM) is an incurable cancer with nearly all patients relapsing and undergoing multiple lines of treatment. Performing head-to-head comparisons of all treatment options is not feasible. Thus, network meta-analyses play an important role in allowing health-care decision makers to compare the effectiveness of treatment options. Objectives: A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) was developed from studies identified from a systematic literature review (SLR) to evaluate the efficacy of once weekly oral selinexor with once weekly bortezomib and low-dose dexamethasone (XVd) relative to other therapies in previously treated MM. Methods: Ovid was systematically searched for phase 2-3 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) in MM that assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and overall response rates (ORR). Two population subsets were assessed: second-line patients (2L) and third-line or greater patients (3L+). Base case results compared all regimens against twice weekly bortezomib and dexamethasone (Vd) as the anchored comparator regimen. Results: Forty-seven RCTs met inclusion. For 2L PFS, OS and ORR, XVd had, on average, out of all iterations, the 6th (out of 21), 4th (out of 15), and 5th (out of 20) best result, respectively, versus Vd. For 3L+ PFS, OS and ORR, XVd had the 12th (out of 24), 11th (out of 22), and 8th (out of 25) best result, respectively, versus Vd. There was no statistically significant difference between XVd and other top-ranking therapies for PFS, OS, and ORR in either 2L and 3L+ except for daratumumab/bortezomib/dexamethasone [DVd], which was favorable versus XVd (2L PFS only). Discussion: Results for XVd were more favorable in 2L, having a higher probability of being a top 5 regimen, compared with 3L+ therapies based on the reported clinical trial results. However, in typical clinical practice, most triplet regimens have been modified using weekly bortezomib dosing, raising questions about the actual efficacy of these regimens versus the reported results using twice weekly bortezomib dosing. Conclusions: The addition of XVd, which was designed with once weekly bortezomib dosing, to the treatment landscape for previously treated MM provides a regimen that may potentially be noninferior to the other top 5 regimens in both 2L and 3L+ settings and is associated with less peripheral neuropathy.

Treatment patterns and outcomes among nontransplant newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in Spain

Aim: To describe treatment patterns and outcomes in nontransplant newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients in Spain. Methods: This retrospective study included two cohorts of NDMM patients diagnosed between 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2013 and 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017. Results: Among 113 patients, proteasome inhibitor (PI) + alkylator combinations (49%) and PI-based regimens without an alkylator (30%) were the most common first-line (1L) therapies. Use of PI + immunomodulatory drug-based regimens increased between the cohorts; PI-based regimens without an alkylator/immunomodulatory drug decreased. Use of 1L oral regimens was low but increased over time; use of maintenance therapy was low across both periods. Median 1L duration of treatment was 6.9 months. Conclusion: Short 1L duration of treatment and low use of 1L oral regimens and maintenance therapy highlight unmet needs in NDMM.

Feasibility of an Online Patient Community to Support Older Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

We conducted a feasibility study of integrating a free, online patient health community, PatientsLikeMe (PLM), into the neo/adjuvant care of older patients recently diagnosed with breast cancer. We assessed whether PLM was an appealing social forum to improve women's treatment experience during this stressful and often isolating time.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We enrolled women ages ≥60 years with recently diagnosed nonmetastatic invasive breast cancer at a single center. Our primary endpoint was feasibility of patient engagement with PLM, with successful engagement defined as using PLM for ≥50% of the total weeks of one's chemotherapy course or 4 months (if receiving hormonal and/or radiation therapy). Participants were surveyed about their health, social support, and experiences.

RESULTS

During February 8, 2016 to June 25, 2018, 47 women enrolled; 14.9% were ages 71 to 75 years and 8.5% were ages ≥76 years; 63.8% received chemotherapy. Two women withdrew after consent; 45 were included in analyses. Overall, 1 (2.2%) patient met the feasibility endpoint, although 8 (17.8%) met engagement criteria for ≥25% of weeks on study. Over time, women submitted a total of >1200 posts to the "InstantMe" feature (rates how they feel) and >130 "MyFeed" stories. Evaluation of satisfaction with PLM was limited by the small number of end-of-study surveys.

CONCLUSION

Although our online social support intervention did not meet the prespecified criteria for feasibility (required sustained PLM utilization), many engaged with PLM. Future interventions should explore ways we can optimally support older patients, who have an increasing access to technology while facing threats of social isolation.

US Budget Impact Model for Selinexor, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

PURPOSE

To estimate the budget impact of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (XVd) in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma (MM) from the perspective of a private third-party payer and Medicare in the US.

METHODS

The introduction of XVd as an option for patients with previously treated MM compared to no introduction of XVd was considered from a private third-party US payer (with 1,000,000 members) and a Medicare perspective in one-year increments for 3 years. Total annual treatment costs were calculated as the sum of drug costs, costs of treating serious treatment emergent adverse events (grade ≥3), ongoing best supportive care costs, and mortality costs.

RESULTS

The absolute budget impact (Millions, USD) of including XVd from a private third-party payer plan perspective was $0.06, $0.07, $0.08 and $0.22 for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. The relative budget impact of including XVd was 0.33%, 0.40%, 0.43%, and 0.38% for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. This translated to a per member per month (PMPM) budget impact of $0.005, $0.006, $0.007, and $0.006 (USD), for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. From a Medicare perspective, the absolute budget impact (Millions, USD) of including XVd was $29.68, $36.62, $39.42 and $105.72 for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. The relative budget impact of including XVd was 0.33%, 0.40%, 0.43%, and 0.38% percent for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. This translated to a PMPM budget impact of $0.041, $0.051, $0.054, and $0.049 (USD), for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed general consistency with the base-case findings.

CONCLUSION

Understanding the potential budget impact of new therapies in MM is vital for payers to manage spending and assess treatment value. The introduction of XVd presents a manageable budget impact for a third-party US payer and Medicare.

Oral therapy adherence and satisfaction in patients with multiple myeloma

The transition to oral therapies in patients with multiple myeloma (MM) offers potential benefits to patients; however, they must self-manage their medication and adherence plays an important role in patient care. It has been shown that patient satisfaction with their medication has a strong positive correlation with adherence in chronic diseases. The aim of this study was to estimate adherence rate of oral antimyeloma therapies and to identify risk factors for medication non-adherence. This observational, prospective, and multicentre survey based on a self-report questionnaire enrolled MM patients with at least 3 months of oral therapy. The 6-item Girerd scale and the medication possession ratio (MPR) were used for measuring medication adherence and the SATMED-Q® questionnaire was used for measuring satisfaction. An analysis of risk factors for non-adherence to oral therapy was performed using univariate analysis. A total of 101 patients participated in the survey, yielding a response rate of 87%. The prevalence of adherence to oral antimyeloma therapy was estimated at 51.5% using the Girerd questionnaire. According to the MPR, adherence was evaluated at 96% (i.e. MPR ≥ 0.80). Both methods combined, adherence was estimated at 50.5%. One risk factor for medication non-adherence was identified: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status > 2 (p = 0.007). One predictive factor for high medication adherence was identified: high satisfaction with treatment (p = 0.01). Identifying patients at higher risk for non-adherence allows clinical pharmacists to personalise therapeutic information and education and to improve the quality of healthcare overall.

Ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone in routine clinical practice: effectiveness in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in routine clinical practice. Patients & methods: Patient-level data from the global, observational INSIGHT MM and the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies were integrated and analyzed. Results: At data cut-off, 263 patients from 13 countries were included. Median time from diagnosis to start of IRd was 35.8 months; median duration of follow-up was 14.8 months. Overall response rate was 73%, median progression-free survival, 21.2 months and time-to-next therapy, 33.0 months. Ixazomib/lenalidomide dose reductions were required in 17%/36% of patients; 32%/30% of patients discontinued ixazomib/lenalidomide due to adverse events. Conclusion: The effectiveness and safety of IRd in routine clinical practice are comparable to those reported in TOURMALINE-MM1. Clinical trial registration: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

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.

Health-Related Quality of Life in Transplant-Ineligible Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Findings From the Phase III MAIA Trial

PURPOSE

To evaluate the effects of daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (D-Rd) versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone (Rd) on patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the phase III MAIA study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

PROs were assessed on the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item and the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system at baseline and every 3 months during treatment. By mixed-effects model, changes from baseline are presented as least squares means with 95% CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 737 transplant-ineligible (TIE) patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were randomly assigned to D-Rd (n = 368) or Rd (n = 369). Compliance with PRO assessments was high at baseline (> 90%) through month 12 (> 78%) for both groups. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30-item global health status scores improved from baseline in both groups and were consistently greater with D-Rd at all time points. A global health status benefit was achieved with D-Rd, regardless of age (< 75 and ≥ 75 years), baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score, or depth of response. D-Rd treatment resulted in significantly greater reduction in pain scores as early as cycle 3 (P = .0007 v Rd); the magnitude of change was sustained through cycle 12. Reductions in pain with D-Rd were clinically meaningful in patients regardless of age, ECOG status, or depth of response. Similarly, PRO improvements were observed with D-Rd and Rd on the EuroQol 5-dimensional descriptive system visual analog scale score.

CONCLUSION

D-Rd compared with Rd was associated with faster and sustained clinically meaningful improvements in PROs, including pain, in transplant-ineligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma regardless of age, baseline ECOG status, or depth of treatment response.