학술논문

Does the Simultaneous Introduction of Several Pharmaceuticals in the Post-Lenalidomide Era Translate to Better Outcomes in Relapse Refractory Multiple Myeloma? Findings from the Real-World Innovation in Multiple Myeloma (REAL IMM) Study.
Document Type
Article
Source
Cancers. Dec2023, Vol. 15 Issue 24, p5846. 16p.
Subject
*THERAPEUTIC use of antineoplastic agents
*RESEARCH
*SCIENTIFIC observation
*CANCER relapse
*RETROSPECTIVE studies
*ACQUISITION of data
*TREATMENT duration
*TREATMENT effectiveness
*COMPARATIVE studies
*MEDICAL records
*DESCRIPTIVE statistics
*RESEARCH funding
*MULTIPLE myeloma
*CARBOCYCLIC acids
*DIFFUSION of innovations
*ALGORITHMS
*EVALUATION
Language
ISSN
2072-6694
Abstract
Simple Summary: On rare occasions, a handful of innovative cancer drugs may successfully go through clinical trials and manage to obtain simultaneous regulatory approvals to treat a specific disease, providing hope for improved treatment outcomes. In the past few years, physicians in North America, Europe, and other countries with stronger economies have been able to use several of the recently approved drugs to treat a blood cancer called multiple myeloma, once older therapies have failed. This study looked at the treatment outcomes associated with the wave of newer drugs in patients diagnosed with multiple myeloma in Greece. The results showed that approximately three-quarters of patients who received one of the newer drugs after having progressed on front-line therapies remained in remission a year after initiating treatment. This finding was comparable to the results from previous studies in Greek patients who were diagnosed with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma and had previously used other therapies. Newer methodologies are needed to assess the real-world comparative effectiveness of a "generation" of pharmaceutical innovation versus the prior standard of care. This chart review study aimed to first evaluate the cumulative clinical benefits of pharmaceutical innovation in everyday relapse/refractory multiple myeloma before analyzing findings in the context of respective real-world outcomes from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. Study endpoints included the 52-week PFS rate in second and third line of therapy (LOT), mPFS-2 across the first and second LOT, the ORR, reasons for discontinuation, and the treatment duration per therapeutic algorithm. Data from 107 patients were collected. The median follow-up was 2.0 years. Of the subjects who met the selection criteria for the second LOT, 72.2% maintained the PFS at 52 weeks. In the third-line setting, the PFS rate at 52 weeks was 63.5%. The mPFS across the first and second, the second, and the third LOTs were 26, 17, and 15 months, respectively. The ORR was 76.1% in the second and 69.7% in the third LOT. After non-response or progression, the main reason for drug discontinuation was treatment intolerability. The second-line ORR and the 52-week PFS rate were similar to previous real-world findings from the bortezomib/lenalidomide era. The cumulative mPFS across the second and third LOTs was higher than the respective mPFS across the first and second LOTs. Despite its limitations, the methodology and findings from this study may be used in future clinical and economic evaluations across all hematological malignancies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]