Molecular Long-Term Analysis of the GMMG-HD4 Trial in Multiple Myeloma-Patterns of Association of Chromosomal Aberrations with Response and Proliferation Determining Survival in Selecting Treatments in View of Limited Resources in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Based on the lack of differences in progression-free and overall survival after a median follow-up of 93 months in our HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial (German part; n = 395) randomizing VAD induction (vincristin/adriamycin/dexamthasone)/tandem-transplantation/thalidomide-maintenance vs. PAD induction (bortezomib/adriamycin/dexamethasone)/tandem transplantation/bortezomib maintenance, we discern how chromosomal aberrations determine long-term prognosis by different patterns of association with proliferation and treatment-dependent response, whether responses achieved by different regimens are equal regarding prognosis, and whether subpopulations of patients could be defined as treatable without upfront "novel agents" in cases of limited resources, e.g., in low- or middle-income countries. Serum parameters and risk factors were assessed in 395 patients. CD138-purified plasma cells were subjected to fluorescence in situ hybridization (n = 354) and gene expression profiling (n = 204). We found chromosomal aberrations to be associated in four patterns with survival, proliferation, and response: deletion (del) del17p13, del8p21, del13q14, (gain) 1q21+, and translocation t(4;14) (all adverse) associate with higher proliferation. Of these, del17p is associated with an adverse response (pattern 1), and 1q21+, t(4;14), and del13q14 with a treatment-dependent better response (pattern 2). Hyperdiploidy associates with lower proliferation without impacting response or survival (pattern 3). Translocation t(11;14) has no association with survival but a treatment-dependent adverse response (pattern 4). Significantly fewer patients reach a near-complete response or better with "conventional" (VAD) vs. bortezomib-based treatment after induction or high-dose melphalan. These patients, however, show significantly better median progression-free and overall survival. Molecularly, patients responding to the two regimens differ in gene expression, indicating distinct biological properties of the responding myeloma cells. Patients with normal renal function (89.4%), low cytogenetic risk (72.5%), or low proliferation rate (37.9%) neither benefit in progression-free nor overall survival from bortezomib-based upfront treatment. We conclude that response level, the treatment by which it is achieved, and molecular background determine long-term prognosis. Chromosomal aberrations are associated in four patterns with proliferation and treatment-dependent responses. Associations with faster and deeper responses can be deceptive in the case of prognostically adverse aberrations 1q21+ and t(4;14). Far from advocating a return to "outdated" treatments, if resources do not permit state-of-the-art-treatment, normal renal function and/or molecular profiling identifies patient subpopulations doing well without upfront "novel agents".

Patient and Caregiver Experience Decision Factors in Treatment Decision Making: Results of a Systematic Literature Review of Multiple Myeloma Decision Aids.

OBJECTIVES: Decision-aids (DAs) may facilitate shared decision-making for patients and caregivers, by providing evidence-based information to assist healthcare professionals, patients, and caregivers in making choices about aspects of care, and/or highlighting decision factors to discuss with the potential of altering the treatment decision. These decision factors may not be well integrated in DAs. METHODS: A systematic literature review was conducted in the field of multiple myeloma (MM) on peer-reviewed publications, extended with a gray literature search. Data on whether and how patient and caregiver experience elements, other than survival and physical quality of life, were mentioned as decision factors in the identified MM DAs were extracted and analyzed qualitatively. RESULTS: Seventy MM DAs were found and analyzed; 51% of DAs mentioned any patient non-routinely assessed experience decision factors and only 17% mentioned any caregiver-related information. One hundred and forty potential decision factors were extracted, deduplicated and categorized into the following categories: 1) financial, 2) mode of administration / transportation issues, 3) personal beliefs and values, 4) emotional and social quality of life, 5) other medical information, 6) availability of social support, 7) caregiver burden. None of the DAs presented a comprehensive framework on all seven categories of decision factors being consider when mapping patient and caregiver experience value elements in MM. CONCLUSIONS: Based on available DAs, we recommend a set of patient and caregiver experience decision factors that have the potential to affect treatment choices of patients with MM, which should be included in DAs, including MM clinical guidelines.

Systematic literature review of health economic models developed for multiple myeloma to support future analyses.

AIMS: The goal of this study was to review the economic evaluations of health technologies in multiple myeloma (MM) and provide guidance and recommendations for future health economic analyses. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systemic literature review (SLR) was conducted on original economic assessment studies and structured review papers focusing on the studies in MM. The search was limited to English language papers published from 1 January 2000 onwards. Publications not applying any type of modelling methodology to describe disease progression and patient pathways over a specific time horizon were excluded. RESULTS: A total of 2,643 publications were initially identified, of which 148 were eligible to be included in the full-text review phase. From these, 49 publications were included in the final analysis. Most published health economic analyses supported by models came from high-income countries. Evaluations from middle-income countries were rarely published. Diagnostic technologies were rarely modelled and integrated care had not been modelled. Very few models investigated MM treatments from a societal perspective and there was a relative lack of evaluations regarding minimal residual disease (MRD). LIMITATIONS: Limitations of the publications included differences between trial populations and modelled populations, justification of methods, lack of confounder analyses, and small trial populations. Limitations of our study included the infeasibility of comparing MM economic evaluations due to the significant variance in modelled therapeutic lines and indications, and the relative scarcity of published economic evaluations from non-high-income countries. CONCLUSIONS: As published economic models lacked many of the elements of the complex and heterogeneous patient pathways in MM and they focused on single decision problems, a thorough, open-source economic whole disease modelling framework is needed to assess the economic value of a wide range of technologies across countries with various income levels with a more detailed view on MM, by including patient-centric and societal aspects.

Beyond medicines' barriers: exploring the true cost of multiple myeloma.

AIM: The goal of this research was to quantify and qualify all the costs associated with multiple myeloma (MM) from a healthcare and societal perspective and to highlight certain costs that are often underestimated. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study used a mixed methods approach that consisted of three phases: a systemic literature review (SLR), a virtual roundtable discussion based on the results of the SLR, and an online survey. RESULTS: In total, 4321 records were identified by literature and snowball searches. After applying the eligibility criteria, 49 articles were included in the narrative summary. As combination treatments have become the mainstay of MM treatment, drug costs have become the most important component of the total healthcare costs. Collected evidence suggests that optimizing treatment pathways, besides prolonging patient survival and maintaining quality of life, has the potential to generate cost savings for all stakeholders (payers and patients). Improved patient access to new therapies that can improve outcomes may reduce the "financial toxicity" of MM by decreasing patients' and caregivers' productivity loss due to better prognosis and it also has the potential of reducing patients' direct health care payments. LIMITATIONS: Heterogeneity of research objectives of included studies, costing methods, and applied measurement units limited the comparability of cost data between studies. Data for more than half of the world's population, including China, Russia, the Middle East, and Africa were not investigated. CONCLUSION: While treatment costs are burdensome for healthcare systems, it is only one of several items that make up the True Cost of MM. Understanding these burdens is one way to argue for optimized treatment pathways and improve patient outcomes by tearing down access barriers.