Multiple myeloma is a disease typical of the elderly, and, because of the increase in life expectancy of the general population, its incidence is expected to grow in the future. Elderly patients represent a particular challenge due to their marked heterogeneity. Many new and highly effective drugs have been introduced in the last few years and results from clinical trials are promising. Besides the availability of novel agents, a careful evaluation of elderly patients showed to be a key factor for the success of therapy. A geriatric assessment is a valid strategy to better stratify patients. In particular, different scores are available today to appropriately assess elderly patients and define their fitness/frailty status. The choice of treatment-transplantation, triplets, doublets, or reduced-dose therapies including novel agents-should depend on the patient's fitness status (fit, intermediate-fit or frail). Second-generation novel agents have also been evaluated as salvage therapy in the elderly, and these new agents certainly represent a further step forward in the treatment armamentarium for elderly patients with multiple myeloma.
Background: Because of the various therapeutic options available for multiple myeloma (MM), remarkable interest exists today in individualized therapeutic concepts based on patients' fitness. The main objectives of this study were to compare different comorbidity scores and functional tests with respect to their impact on survival (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]); develop a timeefficient, MM-specific functional assessment (FA); and evaluate changes in patients' FA during treatment. Methods: The authors performed a prospective FA in 266 consecutive patients with MM at their initial diagnosis. This included 5 comorbidity scores and 12 commonly used geriatric functional tests. To evaluate changes in the course of treatment, the authors reassessed these 17 tests after ≥6 months. The entire analysis included 7327 FA tests. Results: On the basis of univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses, the authors identified 4 of the 17 evaluated scores and functional tests as most relevant: the Revised Myeloma Comorbidity Index (R-MCI), Activity of Daily Living (ADL), the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE), and the quality-of-life 12-Item Short Form Health Survey Physical Composite Scale (SF-12 PCS). These showed precise group differences for fit, (intermediate-fit), and frail patients in OS and PFS: the 3-year OS rates were 90%, 74%, and 43% via the R-MCI for fit, intermediate-fit, and frail patients, respectively (P = .0006); 80% and 66% via the ADL for fit and frail patients, respectively (P = .0159); 78% and 48% via the MMSE for fit and frail patients, respectively (P = .0001); and 86% and 66% via the SF-12 PCS for fit and frail patients, respectively (P = .0091). In follow-up analyses, 16 of 17 FA tests improved, mostly in younger patients (<70 years old) and responding patients (partial remission or better). Conclusions: Patients may recover from functional and physical limitations under applied MM therapy. The newly established MM-specific FA (via the R-MCI, ADL, MMSE, and SF-12 PCS) allows a precise evaluation of the prognosis and risk status in MM. Its use may improve treatment tolerability and should be validated to individualize MM treatment decisions in the future. Cancer 2021;0:1-15.
In heterogeneous multiple myeloma (MM) patients treatment decisions are challenging. The hypothesis was that adaptation of treatment intensity (dose reduction [DR] vs. none) according to an objective risk score (Revised-Myeloma Comorbidity Index [R-MCI]) rather than physician judgement alone may improve therapy efficacy and avoid toxicities.
We performed this study in 250 consecutive MM patients who underwent a prospective fitness assessment at our center, yet received induction protocols based on physicians’ judgement. DR, serious adverse events (SAEs), response, progression free- (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared in fitness (fit, intermediate-fit, frail), age (
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.