Multiple myeloma, race, insurance and treatment.

PURPOSE: Multiple Myeloma (MM), the second leading blood malignancy, has complex and costly disease management. We studied patterns of treatment disparities and unplanned interruptions among the MM patients after the Affordable Care Act to assess their prevalence and effect on survival. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective study of 1002 MM patients at a tertiary referral center used standard guidelines as a reference to identify underuse of effective treatments. We used multivariate logistic regression and Cox proportionate hazard to study the prognostic effect on survival. RESULTS: Median age in the cohort was 63.0 [IQR: 14] years. Non-Hispanic White (NHW) patients were older (p = 0.007) and more likely to present with stage I disease (p = 0.02). Underuse of maintenance therapy (aOR = 1.98; 95 % CI 1.12-3.48) and interruptions in treatment were associated with race/ethnicity and insurance (aOR = 4.14; 95 % CI: 1.78-9.74). Only underuse of induction therapy was associated with overall patient survival. CONCLUSION: Age, race, ethnicity and primary insurance contribute to the underuse of treatment and in unplanned interruptions in MM treatment. Addressing underuse causes in such patients is warranted.

Where you live can impact your cancer risk: a look at multiple myeloma in New York City.

PURPOSE: To visualize variation in multiple myeloma (MM) incidence and mortality rates by race-ethnicity and geographic location and evaluate their correlation with neighborhood-level population covariates within New York City (NYC). METHODS: Trends and racial differences in MM incidence and mortality for the United States [Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Cancer Registry (SEER), National Center for Health Statistics], and NYC [New York State Cancer Registry] were compared using Joinpoint regression. Pearson's correlation coefficients measured neighborhood-level MM-covariate relationships (n = 34). RESULTS: MM incidence rates are double in African-Americans compared with Whites, in SEER-13 areas (rate ratio (RR) = 2.27; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.22-2.32) and NYC (RR = 2.11; 95% CI = 2.03-2.20). Incidence rates increased faster in NYC (average annual percentage change difference, -1.1; 95% CI, -2.3 to -0.1). NYC African-American men experienced the steepest increase in mortality rates after 2001. In NYC, strong neighborhood-level correlations exist between incidence and mortality rates and high prevalence of residents of African ancestry, Latin American birth, daily sugary beverage and low fruit and vegetable consumption, and neighborhood walkability. Higher MM mortality also correlates with Hispanic ethnicity, obesity, diabetes, poverty, HIV/AIDS, air benzene concentration, and indoor pesticide use. CONCLUSIONS: NYC neighborhoods with large minority populations have higher prevalence of poverty-related factors associated with MM incidence and mortality, warranting public health policies to address exposures and access to care.

Pharmacoeconomic impact of up-front use of plerixafor for autologous stem cell mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND AIMS: Stem cell collection can be a major component of overall cost of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). Plerixafor is an effective agent for mobilization; however, it is often reserved for salvage therapy because of its high cost. We present data on the pharmacoeconomic impact of the use of plerixafor as an up-front mobilization in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). METHODS: Patients with MM who underwent ASCT between January 2008 and April 2011 at the Mount Sinai Medical Center were reviewed retrospectively. In April 2010, practice changes were instituted for patients with MM to delay initiation of granulocyte-colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support from day 0 to day +5 and to add plerixafor to G-CSF as an up-front autologous mobilization. Targets of collection were 5-10 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg. RESULTS: Of 50 adults with MM who underwent ASCT, 25 received plerixafor/filgrastim and 25 received G-CSF alone as an up-front mobilization. Compared with the control, plerixafor mobilization yielded higher CD34(+) cell content (16.1 versus 8.4 × 10(6) CD34(+) cells/kg; P = 0.0007) and required fewer sessions of apheresis (1.9 versus 3.1; P = 0.0001). In the plerixafor group, the mean number of plerixafor doses required per patient was 1.8. Although the overall cost of medications was higher in the plerixafor group, the cost for blood products and overall cost of hospitalization were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Up-front use of plerixafor is an effective mobilization strategy in patients with MM and does not have a substantial pharmacoeconomic impact in overall cost of hospitalization combined with the apheresis procedure.