NYU Langone Health, New York, NY, USA.
Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers, Denver, CO, USA.
Ann Hematol. 2021 Sep;100(9):2325-2337. doi: 10.1007/s00277-021-04534-8. Epub 2021 May 10.
Multiple available combinations of proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulators (IMIDs), and monoclonal antibodies are shifting the relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) treatment landscape. Lack of head-to-head trials of triplet regimens highlights the need for real-world (RW) evidence. We conducted an RW comparative effectiveness analysis of bortezomib (V), carfilzomib (K), ixazomib (I), and daratumumab (D) combined with either lenalidomide or pomalidomide plus dexamethasone (Rd or Pd) in RRMM. A retrospective cohort of patients initiating triplet regimens in line of therapy (LOT) ≥ 2 on/after 1/1/2014 was followed between 1/2007 and 3/2018 in Optum's deidentified US electronic health records database. Time to next treatment (TTNT) was estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods; regimens were compared using covariate-adjusted Cox proportional hazard models. Seven hundred forty-one patients (820 patient LOTs) with an Rd backbone (VRd, n = 349; KRd, n = 218; DRd, n = 99; IRd, n = 154) and 348 patients (392 patient LOTs) with a Pd backbone (VPd, n = 52; KPd, n = 146; DPd, n = 149; IPd, n = 45) in LOTs ≥2 were identified. More patients ≥75 years received IRd (39.6%), IPd (37.8%), and VRd (36.7%) than other triplets. More patients receiving VRd/VPd were in LOT2 vs other triplets. Unadjusted median TTNT in LOT ≥ 2: VRd, 13.9; KRd, 8.7; IRd, 11.4; DRd, not estimable (NE); and VPd, 12.0; KPd, 6.7; IPd, 9.5 months; DPd, NE. In covariate-adjusted analysis, only KRd vs DRd was associated with a significantly higher risk of next LOT initiation/death (HR 1.72; P = 0.0142); no Pd triplet was significantly different vs DPd in LOT ≥ 2. Our data highlight important efficacy/effectiveness gaps between results observed in phase 3 clinical trials and those realized in the RW.
蛋白酶体抑制剂、免疫调节剂 (IMIDs) 和单克隆抗体的多种可用组合正在改变复发/难治性多发性骨髓瘤 (RRMM) 的治疗格局。三联方案头对头试验的缺乏凸显了真实世界 (RW) 证据的必要性。我们对硼替佐米 (V)、卡非佐米 (K)、伊沙佐米 (I) 和达雷妥尤单抗 (D) 联合来那度胺或泊马度胺加地塞米松 (Rd 或 Pd) 在 RRMM 中的疗效进行了 RW 比较效果分析。一项回顾性队列研究纳入了自 2014 年 1 月 1 日起接受≥2 线治疗的患者,随访时间为 2007 年 1 月至 2018 年 3 月,来自 Optum 去识别化的美国电子健康记录数据库。采用 Kaplan-Meier 方法估计下一次治疗时间 (TTNT);采用协变量调整的 Cox 比例风险模型比较方案。确定了以 Rd 为基础的 741 例患者 (820 例患者 LOT) (VRd,n = 349;KRd,n = 218;DRd,n = 99;IRd,n = 154) 和 348 例患者 (392 例患者 LOT) 以 Pd 为基础的 (VPd,n = 52;KPd,n = 146;DPd,n = 149;IPd,n = 45) LOT ≥2。≥75 岁的患者接受 IRd(39.6%)、IPd(37.8%)和 VRd(36.7%)的比例高于其他三联方案。接受 VRd/VPd 的患者 LOT2 比例高于其他三联方案。LOT≥2 时未调整的中位 TTNT:VRd,13.9;KRd,8.7;IRd,11.4;DRd,不可估计 (NE);VPd,12.0;KPd,6.7;IPd,9.5 个月;DPd,NE。在协变量调整分析中,只有 KRd 与 DRd 相比,下一次 LOT 起始/死亡的风险显著增加 (HR 1.72;P = 0.0142);在 LOT≥2 时,Pd 三联方案与 DPd 相比,没有显著差异。我们的数据突显了 3 期临床试验观察到的疗效/有效性与 RW 中实现的疗效/有效性之间的重要差距。