Listening to What Matters Most: Consumer Endorsed Patient Reported Outcome Measures (PROMs) for Use in Multiple Myeloma Clinical Trials: A Descriptive Exploratory Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with multiple myeloma (MM) experience some of the highest levels of symptom burden of all hematological malignancies. Therefore, assessment of quality of life (QoL) is critical for the delivery of patient-centered cancer care. Patient reported outcome measures (PROMs) are commonly used to measure QoL in people with MM. However, it is unknown whether measures used, are appropriate and informative to address issues that matter most to patients. AIM: This exploratory study was designed to establish consumer endorsed PROMs to measure QoL in people with MM. METHOD: This was a descriptive, exploratory study. Participants were invited to provide feedback on the acceptability, appropriateness, and practicability of ten commonly used PROMs via telephone-based, semi-structured interviews and surveys. Data were analyzed using a manifest content analysis approach and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: 26 individuals participated in the study. Participants emphasized the importance of selecting a suite of PROMs that captures the diversity of quality-of-life experiences and priorities reported over the course of treatment, while minimizing the burden of completing PROMs. Based on these criteria, a suite of three PROMs - the MyPOS, the Brief Fatigue Inventory, and COST-FACIT were endorsed by study participants. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study of its kind to establish a suite of consumer-endorsed PROMs for use in clinical trials in patients with MM. Ensuring that the patient voice is at the center of advances in cancer treatment is a hallmark of quality cancer care.

The development of a home-based therapeutic platform for multiple myeloma.

BACKGROUND: Multiple Myeloma (MM) accounts for 1-2% of all malignancies but is the second most common hematological malignancy. It is characterized by a proliferation of malignant plasma cells. The treatment paradigm of MM in Australia is traditionally hospital-based, complex, and costly. While MM comprises 1-2% of cancer diagnoses, it appears in the top 10 cancer diagnoses requiring hospital admission. The cumulative time spent receiving treatment is a significant burden for patients. The ability to receive treatment at home and maximize time away from hospital-based settings is a key preference for patients receiving anticancer therapies over a prolonged period of time. METHODS: The Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and Royal Melbourne Hospital's combined Clinical Hematology Unit has collaborated with their Hospital in the Home departments to develop several innovative programs to address this. RESULTS: We describe our current active programs and potential developments in home-based MM therapy. CONCLUSION: We have enabled large numbers of patients to receive complex therapies in their own home and the COVID-19 pandemic has increased the pace of the roll out without any compromise in safety. We anticipate that the next raft of immunotherapies will be able to transition into the @Home treatment setting in the coming years.

The association of mobilising regimen on immune reconstitution and survival in myeloma patients treated with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induction followed by a melphalan autograft.

G-CSF only mobilisation has been shown to enhance immune reconstitution early post-transplant, but its impact on survival remains uncertain. We undertook a retrospective review of 12 transplant centres to examine overall survival (OS) and time to next treatment (TTNT) following melphalan autograft according to mobilisation method (G-CSF only vs. G-CSF and cyclophosphamide [CY]) in myeloma patients uniformly treated with bortezomib, cyclophosphamide and dexamethasone induction. Six centres had a policy to use G-CSF alone and six to use G-CSF + CY. Patients failing G-CSF only mobilisation were excluded. 601 patients were included: 328: G-CSF + CY, 273: G-CSF only. Mobilisation arms were comparable in terms of age, Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) groups and post-transplant maintenance therapy. G-CSF + CY mobilisation generated higher median CD34 + yields (8.6 vs. 5.5 × 106/kg, p < 0.001). G-CSF only mobilisation was associated with a significantly higher lymphocyte count at day 15 post-infusion (p < 0.001). G-CSF only mobilisation was associated with significantly improved OS (aHR = 0.60, 95%CI 0.39-0.92, p = 0.018) and TTNT (aHR = 0.77, 95%CI 0.60-0.97, p = 0.027), when adjusting for R-ISS, disease-response pre-transplant, age and post-transplant maintenance therapy. This survival benefit may reflect selection bias in excluding patients with unsuccessful G-CSF only mobilisation or may be due to enhanced autograft immune cell content and improved early immune reconstitution.