Treatment and Survival Outcomes of Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia in Latin American Patients: A Multinational Retrospective Cohort Study.

PURPOSE: Waldenstrom Macroglobulinemia (WM) is a rare lymphoma with distinct clinical features, and data from Latin American patients are lacking. Therefore, we aim to investigate the clinical, therapy, and outcome patterns of WM in Latin America. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed patients with WM diagnosed between 1991 and 2019 from 24 centers in seven Latin American countries. The study outcomes were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: We identified 159 cases (median age 67 years, male 62%). Most patients (95%) were symptomatic at diagnosis. The International Prognostic Scoring System for WM (IPSSWM) at diagnosis was available in 141 (89%) patients (high-risk 40%, intermediate-risk 37%, and low-risk 23%). Twenty-seven (17%) patients were tested for MYD88L265P, with 89% (n = 24 of 27) carrying the mutation. First-line and second-line therapies were administered to 142 (89%) and 53 (33%) patients, respectively. Chemoimmunotherapy was the most commonly used first-line (66%) and second-line (45%) approach; only 18 (11%) patients received ibrutinib. With a median follow-up of 69 months, the 5-year OS rate was 81%. In treated patients, the 5-year OS and PFS rates were 78% and 59%, respectively. High-risk IPSSWM at treatment initiation was an independent risk factor for OS (adjusted hazard ratio: 4.73, 95% CI, 1.67 to 13.41, P = .003) and PFS (adjusted hazard ratio: 2.43, 95% CI, 1.31 to 4.50, P = .005). CONCLUSION: In Latin America, the management of WM is heterogeneous, with limited access to molecular testing and novel agents. However, outcomes were similar to those reported internationally. We validated the IPSSWM score as a prognostic factor for OS and PFS. There is an unmet need to improve access to recommended diagnostic approaches and therapies in Latin America.

Real-world outcomes for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients with lenalidomide-dexamethasone combinations in a Latin American country. A retrospective cohort study from grupo argentino de mieloma múltiple.

OBJECTIVES: We compared the efficacy of lenalidomide-dexamethasone (Rd) based treatments for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients (pts), in a real-world setting. In addition, we evaluated adverse events (AE), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). METHODS: In our retrospective, multicentric study, 156 pts with RRMM were included. 74/156 pts (47%) were refractory to bortezomib (V) and 43/156 (27%) pts to lenalidomide (R), with 24/156 (15%) of pts double refractory. Eighty-six pts (55%) received Rd with carfilzomib (KRd), 30 pts (19%) bortezomib (VRd), 30 pts (19%) daratumumab (DRd), and 10 pts (6%) ixazomib (IRd). RESULTS: The overall response (ORR) (≥ partial response) for the entire cohort was 71%, with a very good partial response rate or better (≥VGPR) of 35%. We found no significant differences in CR or ≥VGRP rates between treatments (p:0.229). Regardless of the combination received, those patients who achieved CR had significantly improved PFS (p: 0.007). The most frequent cause of treatment discontinuation was disease progression in 55/156 pts (35%). 8 pts (5%) discontinued treatment due to treatment-related adverse events (AE). CONCLUSION: This is the first report of Rd combinations for the treatment of RRMM in Latin America. All combinations proved to be effective with an acceptable toxicity.

Different outcomes for transplant-eligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in Latin America according to the public versus private management: a GELAMM study.

The aim of this study was to describe clinical and survival characteristics of transplant-eligible multiple myeloma (MM) patients in Latin America (LA), with a special focus on differences between public and private healthcare facilities. We included 1293 patients diagnosed between 2010 and 2018. A great disparity in outcomes and survival between both groups was observed. Late diagnosis and low access to adequate frontline therapy and ASCT in public institutions probably explain these differences. Patients treated with novel drug induction protocols, followed by autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and maintenance, have similar overall survival compared to that published internationally.