ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: We conducted a multicenter retrospective study to analyze the safety and efficacy of DPd versus DKd in daratumumab naïve RRMM patients treated in real-world practice. RESULTS: A total of 187 patients with RRMM were included in the analysis; 128 patients received DPd, and 59 patients received DKd. A vast majority (80%) of patients had lenalidomide refractory disease and nearly 50% had bortezomib refractory disease. The overall response and complete response rates were 76% and 34% in the DPd group versus 80% and 51% in the DKd group, respectively. With a median follow up of 36 months for the entire patient population, median PFS and OS in the DPd versus DKd groups were 12, 12, 37, and 35 months, respectively. The most common grade 3+ adverse events in the DPd versus DKd groups were neutropenia (32% vs. 7%), anemia (14% vs. 10%), thrombocytopenia (13% vs. 15%), and cardiovascular events (4% vs. 15%), respectively. Both DPd and DKd appeared to be a safe and effective treatment options for RRMM. CONCLUSIONS: While there were more cytopenias associated with DPd and more cardiovascular side effects with DKd, there were no significant differences in the survival outcomes with these two regimens.
Subject(s)
Antibodies, Monoclonal , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols , Dexamethasone , Multiple Myeloma , Oligopeptides , Thalidomide , Thalidomide/analogs & derivatives , Humans , Multiple Myeloma/drug therapy , Multiple Myeloma/mortality , Multiple Myeloma/diagnosis , Male , Female , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/adverse effects , Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Aged , Middle Aged , Dexamethasone/administration & dosage , Dexamethasone/adverse effects , Dexamethasone/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/administration & dosage , Antibodies, Monoclonal/therapeutic use , Antibodies, Monoclonal/adverse effects , Thalidomide/administration & dosage , Thalidomide/therapeutic use , Thalidomide/adverse effects , Retrospective Studies , Oligopeptides/administration & dosage , Oligopeptides/adverse effects , Oligopeptides/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Aged, 80 and over , Adult , Recurrence , RetreatmentABSTRACT
Chimeric antigen receptor T cell therapy (CAR-T) and bispecific T cell engagers (TCE) for multiple myeloma (MM) are readily available at many large US medical centers. However, many potentially eligible patients may not be referred to the specialized centers administering these therapies. Perspectives regarding potential barriers for MM cellular therapy from referring-center oncologists (ROs) versus treating-center oncologists (TOs) have not been reported previously. We conducted TACTUM-23, a survey of US oncologists who treat MM, to identify perceived barriers to these cellular therapies. This 24-question survey, which focused on demographics and perceived barriers to CAR-T and TCE, was conducted between June and August 2023. Of 247 oncologists, 37 (15%) completed the survey including 26 (70%) TOs who prescribed both CAR-T and TCEs, 4 (11%) TOs who only prescribed TCEs, and 7 (19%) ROs who referred patients. The top RO-stated barrier to CAR-T was financial toxicity, while the top TO-stated barrier to CAR-T was leukapheresis/ manufacturing slot availability. The top RO-stated barrier to TCE was financial toxicity, while the top TO-stated barrier to TCE was the hospitalization requirement. In conclusion, financial concerns are perceived by ROs to be the top barrier to both CAR-T and TCEs in myeloma. In contrast, TOs perceive logistical concerns to be the top barrier. Interventions to lower financial toxicity during these therapies, and outreach to raise awareness of such interventions among ROs, are needed alongside strategies to streamline manufacturing (for CAR-T) and monitoring.