BackgroundUnattached patients do not have a regular primary care provider. Initiatives are being developed to increase attachment rates across Canada. Most existing attention paid to patient unattachment has focused on quantifying the problem and health system costs. Our purpose is to qualitatively identify the implications of chronically ill patients’ experiences of unattachment for health policy and planning to provide policy-relevant insights for Canadian attachment initiatives.MethodsThree focus groups were conducted with marginalized chronically ill individuals residing in a mid-sized city in British Columbia who are unattached to a family doctor. We use the term marginalized as a descriptor to acknowledge that by virtue of their low socio-economic status and lack of attachment the participants are marginalized in Canada’s health care system Focus groups were structured as an open conversation organized around a series of probing questions. They were digitally recorded and transcribed verbatim. Thematic analysis was employed.ResultsTwenty-six individuals participated in the focus groups. The most common chronic illnesses reported were active drug addiction or recovery (and their associated symptoms), depression, arthritis, and hepatitis C. Participants identified life transitions as being the root cause for not having a family doctor. There was a strong sense that unsuccessful attempts to get a family doctor reflected that they were undesirable patients. Participants wanted to experience having a trusting relationship with a regular family doctor as they believed it would encourage greater honesty and transparency. One of the main health concerns regarding lack of access to a regular family doctor is that participants lacked access to preventative care. Participants were also concerned about having a discontinuous medical record due to unattachment.ConclusionsParticipants perceived that there are many benefits to be had by having attachment to a regular family doctor and that experiencing unattachment challenged their health and access to health care. We encourage more research to be done on the lived experience of unattachment in order to provide on-the-ground insights that policy-makers require in order to develop responsive, patient-centred supports and programs.

IMPORTANCERecently, the benefit of adding daratumumab to the proteasome inhibitor-based, 3-drug combination of bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who underwent high-dose melphalan chemotherapy and autologous hemopoietic cell transplant was assessed. Here, we examine the addition of daratumumab to the second-generation proteasome inhibitor-based, 3-drug combination of carfilzomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone. OBJECTIVE To assess the safety and effectiveness of carfilzomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasonedaratumumab combination therapy for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, in the absence of high-dose melphalan chemotherapy and autologous hemopoietic cell transplant. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Clinical and correlative pilot study at the Memorial SloanKettering Cancer Center in New York, New York. Patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma were enrolled between October 1, 2018, and November 15, 2019. The median follow-up from start of treatment was 20.3 months (95% CI, 19.2-21.9 months).INTERVENTIONS Eight 28-day cycles with intravenous carfilzomib, 20/56 mg/m 2 (days 1, 8, and 15); oral lenalidomide, 25 mg, (days 1-21); dexamethasone, 40 mg weekly, orally or intravenously (cycles 1-4), and 20 mg after cycle 4; and intravenous daratumumab, 16 mg/kg (days 1, 8, 15, and 22 [cycles 1-2]; days 1 and 15 [cycles 3-6]; and day 1 [cycles 7 and 8]). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary end point was the minimal residual disease (MRD) rate, in the absence of high-dose melphalan chemotherapy and autologous hemopoietic cell transplant. Secondary end points included determining safety and tolerability, evaluating rates of clinical response per the International Myeloma Working Group, and estimating progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) rates.RESULTS Forty-one evaluable patients were enrolled (median age, 59 years; range, 30-70 years); 25 (61%) were female, and 20 (49%) had high-risk multiple myeloma. The primary end point (MRD negativity in the bone marrow; 10 −5 sensitivity) was achieved in 29 of 41 patients (71%; 95% CI, 54%-83%), and therefore the trial was deemed successful. Median time to MRD negativity was 6 cycles (range, 1-8 cycles). Secondary end points of the overall response rate and the very good partial response or complete response rate were 100% (41 of 41 patients) and 95% (39 of 41 patients), respectively. At 11 months of the median follow-up, the 1-year PFS rate and the OS rate were 98% (95% CI, 93%-100%) and 100%, respectively. Most common (Ն2 patients) grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (12 patients [27%]), rash (4 patients [9%]), lung infection (3 patients [7%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase level (2 patients [4%]). There were no deaths. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this nonrandomized clinical trial, carfilzomib-lenalidomidedexamethasone-daratumumab combination therapy was associated with high rates of MRD negativity in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and high rates of PFS.

No abstract

INTRODUCTION. Bortezomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (VRd) is considered a standard of care combination therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. Prior studies show that ~25% of patients treated with 8 cycles of VRd achieve minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity. Recently, 42% stringent complete response (sCR) rates were reported with the use of VRd combined with the CD38-targeted monoclonal antibody daratumumab (VRd-D). Prior studies using 8 cycles of bi-weekly carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (bKRd) combination therapy in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma show ~40% MRD negativity rates. We were motivated to develop a phase 2 study (total N=82) using weekly dosing of carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (wKRd) in combination with daratumumab (wKRd-D). Our study also included a parallel cohort of bi-weekly dosing of carfilzomib 36 mg/m2 with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (bKRd) in combination with daratumumab (bKRd-D). Primary end-point of our study was to rule out 60% and to target up to 80% MRD negativity rate. METHODS. This is a two-arm, Phase II clinical trial based on Simon's optimal two-stage design. The once-a-week carfilzomib (wKRd) (N=41) has the following treatment schedule: 8 cycles of treatment; 28-day cycles with carfilzomib 20/56 mg/m2 days 1, 8, and 15; lenalidomide 25 mg days 1-21; dexamethasone 40 mg weekly cycles 1-4, 20 mg after cycle 4; and daratumumab 16 mg/kg days 1, 8, 15, and 22 cycles 1-2, days 1 and 15 cycles 3-6, and day 1 cycles 7-8. The bi-weekly carfilzomib (bKRd) (N=41): 8 cycles of treatment; 28-day cycles with carfilzomib 20/36 mg/m2 days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15 and 16; lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and daratumumab are given at the same doses/schedules as the weekly cohort. For fit patients, stem cell collection is recommended after 4 to 6 cycles of therapy; DKRd therapy is resumed after collection to a total of 8 cycles DKRd. Treatment response is being assessed with parallel bone marrow-based MRD assays (10-color single tube flowcytometry and invivoscribe IGHV sequencing); per IMWG guidelines both MRD assays allow detection of 1 myeloma cell in 100,000 bone marrow cells (10^-5). Baseline bone marrow samples are evaluated with targeted DNA sequencing for FISH-Seq and somatic mutational characteristics (myTYPE). RESULTS. The first stage of the weekly cohort (wKRd-D) is fully enrolled (N=28) and the second stage of the cohort (N=13) is anticipated to complete enrollment shortly (total N=41). Currently, 29 patients meeting eligibility criteria were enrolled (14 males, 15 females) between October 2018 and August 2019. Baseline characteristics include; median age 59 years (range 36-70 years); 12 (41%) patients had high-risk FISH/SNP signature defined as one or more of the following: 1q+, t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20), and 17p-. At the submission of this abstract, 28 patients have completed one or more cycles wKRd-D; among these, 10 patients have completed therapy. The median number of cycles delivered is currently 6 (range 1-8). Seven of the 10 patients who have completed study treatment are MRD negative. So far, additional 8 patients have become MRD negative while on therapy. Thus, among patients treated on the weekly cohort (wKRd-D) and who were evaluable for the MRD primary end-point at this analysis, we found 15/18 (83%) to be MRD negative. We further show no added major clinical toxicities with wKRd-D compared to our institution standard of care bKRd. The bi-weekly carfilzomib cohort (bKRd-D) shows similar results to the weekly cohort (wKRd-D). With a comparable efficacy and safety profile coupled with a substantial reduction of the number of infusions (total of 51 vs 27 infusions with bKRd-D vs wKRd-D, respectively), we conclude that the weekly dosing (wKRd-D) may offer an attractive treatment modality for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients. CONCLUSIONS. Among patients evaluable for the MRD primary end-point, in the absence of an autologous bone marrow transplant, we show an unprecedented 15/18 (83%) MRD negativity rate among newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated on the weekly cohort (wKRd-D) using carfilzomib 56 mg/m2 dosing. Our promising results have prompted the development of a large randomized multi-center study ("ADVANCE") evaluating wKRd-D in relation to established standard of care, which is anticipated to start enrollment in Q3/Q4 of 2019. Disclosures Landgren: Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Adaptive: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Merck: Other: IDMC; Theradex: Other: IDMC; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Lesokhin:GenMab: Consultancy, Honoraria; BMS: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Juno: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Serametrix Inc.: Patents & Royalties. Mailankody:Juno: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda Oncology: Research Funding; CME activity by Physician Education Resource: Honoraria. Hassoun:Novartis: Consultancy; Celgene: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding. Smith:Fate Therapeutics and Precision Biosciences: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties, Research Funding. Shah:Physicians' Education Resource: Honoraria. Landau:Caelum: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Prothena: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Scordo:Angiocrine Bioscience, Inc.: Consultancy; McKinsey & Company: Consultancy. Arcila:Invivoscribe, Inc.: Consultancy, Honoraria. Ho:Invivoscribe, Inc.: Honoraria. Roshal:Auron Therapeutics: Equity Ownership, Other: Provision of services; Physicians' Education Resource: Other: Provision of services; Celgene: Other: Provision of Services. Dogan:Corvus Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Takeda: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Roche: Consultancy, Research Funding. OffLabel Disclosure: Dara-KRd is not an FDA approved combination therapy for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Abstract. Background: Research on models of implementation that enable widespread dissemination of suicide prevention to young adults is needed to address the critical public health issue of suicide among young adults. A peer-to-peer implementation approach may increase widespread dissemination of suicide prevention on college campuses.  Aims: The current study involved the evaluation of a peer-led implementation of the evidence-based program Question, Persuade, and Refer Gatekeeper Training for Suicide Prevention (QPR). Method: A total of 161 college students attended one of eight QPR implementations conducted by student peer educators certified as QPR trainers. Questionnaires were administered at pretest and posttest to assess knowledge of suicide, likelihood of intervening with someone suicidal, and self-efficacy to intervene with someone suicidal. Results: Results from a series of paired-samples t tests showed significant increases from pretest to posttest on the three outcomes of interest – knowledge of suicide, self-efficacy to intervene with someone suicidal, and likelihood to intervene with someone suicidal. Limitations: The short time frame of the current study is a limitation. Conclusion: Support for a peer-led model of implementation for college students has critical implications in terms of increasing the capacity for widespread dissemination of suicide prevention efforts on college campuses.