RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: In recent years, an increasing number of patient-reported outcome assessment tools (PROs) have been developed specifically to ascertain patients' perceptions of different drug treatments. Among them, the injection process has been analysed, especially in patients chronically treated with chronic biological therapies. One of the main advantages of most current biological therapies is the possibility to self-administer medication at home through the use of a variety of devices, including prefilled syringes (PFS) and prefilled pens (PFP). OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to conduct qualitative research to assess the degree of preference between the different pharmaceutical forms PFS and PFP. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional observational study in patients on biological drug therapy through the compilation of a web-based questionnaire at the time of routine delivery of biological therapy. Questions regarding primary diagnosis, adherence to therapy, the preferred pharmaceutical form and the main reason for preference among five possibilities already reported in the scientific literature were included. RESULTS: During the study period, data were collected from 111 patients and 68 (58%) indicated PFP as their preference. From the analysis of reasons that led a patient to choose one device over another, PFSs are chosen mainly out of habit (n=13 (28.3%) PFS vs n=2 (3.1%) PFP) while PFPs are chosen to avoid needle vision (n=15 (23.1%) PFP vs n=1 (2.2%) PFS). Both differences were found to be statistically significant (p<0.001). CONCLUSION: As biological subcutaneous drugs are increasingly prescribed for a wide variety of long-term therapies, further research focused on identifying patient factors which may enhance adherence to treatment will become even more valuable.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: In this retrospective real-life study in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients, we analyzed clinical and biologic features distinguishing patients with rapidly progressing disease while receiving lenalidomide therapy from those without progression. PATIENTS AND METHODS: According to time of stopping lenalidomide, patients were subdivided into 3 groups: early stop (ES) (n = 23), when therapy was discontinued within 6 months; intermediate (INT) (n = 23), when therapy was stopped between 7 to 24 months; and long survival (LS) (n = 45), when therapy was maintained for more than 2 years. The median age of the whole cohort was 70 years (range, 42-85 years); 40% had an International Staging System score of 2 or 3. RESULTS: High-risk cytogenetic findings, including 1q gain, was reported in 65% ES, 43% INT, and 21% LS. Overall response rate was 63%, with median progression-free survival and overall survival of 33 and 56 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: Although high-risk cytogenetic findings negatively affect progression-free survival and overall survival, 28% of cytogenetic high-risk patients experienced long survival, provided that lenalidomide therapy was not discontinued, thus pointing to the role of maintenance therapy in this subset of patients.
