Patient-Reported Factors in Treatment Satisfaction in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Chari, Ajai; Romanus, Dorothy; DasMahapatra, Pronabesh; Hoole, Michael; Lowe, Maria; Curran, Chris; Campbell, Scott; Bell, Jill A.

doi:10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0724

Cited by 31 publications

(32 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, IRd therapy offers the potential for improved medication adherence compared with regimens which include a parenteral component. Additionally, the administration of an all-oral treatment regimen has been associated with increased patient-reported satisfaction with treatment convenience [40].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Routine Clinical Practice: Effectiveness in Relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma in routine clinical practice. Patients & methods: Patient-level data from the global, observational INSIGHT MM and the Czech Registry of Monoclonal Gammopathies were integrated and analyzed. Results: At data cut-off, 263 patients from 13 countries were included. Median time from diagnosis to start of IRd was 35.8 months; median duration of follow-up was 14.8 months. Overall response rate was 73%, median progression-free survival, 21.2 months and time-to-next therapy, 33.0 months. Ixazomib/lenalidomide dose reductions were required in 17%/36% of patients; 32%/30% of patients discontinued ixazomib/lenalidomide due to adverse events. Conclusion: The effectiveness and safety of IRd in routine clinical practice are comparable to those reported in TOURMALINE-MM1. Clinical trial registration: NCT02761187 (ClinicalTrials.gov)

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Routine Clinical Practice: Effectiveness in Relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Extended travel distances to therapy or inconvenient care locations are barriers to patient care, particularly for those receiving later-line oncology therapy who may have poorer performance status. Travel can also greatly increase out-of-pocket therapy costs, making it unfeasible or burdensome for some patients to receive treatment [3,[5][6][7]. Consequently, longer travel distances may impose socioeconomic and clinical disparities on patients.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

Snyder¹,

Chung

Jun

et al. 2021

Adv Ther

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Geographic access to novel oncology therapies, and the extent to which it may vary by potential sites of care, regions, and population characteristics, is poorly understood. We examined how expanding access to chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T cell therapy administration sites impacts patient travel distances and time. Methods: We used geographic information system techniques to calculate shortest travel distance and time between patients with relapsed/refractory diffuse large B cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and the nearest CAR T cell therapy administration site in three scenarios: academic hospitals; academic and community multispecialty hospitals; and academic and community multispecialty hospitals plus nonacademic specialty oncology network centers. Main outcome measures were differences in travel distance and time among the scenarios and the relationship between travel time and socioeconomic status, race, rural-urban areas, and non-Hodgkin lymphoma clusters. Non-Hodgkin lymphoma incidence, socioeconomic status, and administration centers were derived from governmental/publicly available data sources. Results: Of 3922 patients eligible for CAR T cell therapy, more than 37% had to travel more than 1 h to the nearest academic hospital. Average travel time and distance were significantly reduced by 23% and 30% (P \ 0.001), respectively, when access was expanded to include community hospitals plus a broader range of oncology specialty treatment centers. Compared to academic hospitals alone, increasing access to include community hospitals decreased time and distance by 7% and 8% (P \ 0.01), respectively. In addition, there would be a lower proportion of sites operating as the only care provider within 25 miles if access was expanded outside of academic hospitals only. Longer travel time was associated with lower socioeconomic status. Conclusion: Many patients with DLBCL have long travel times to an academic hospital that Karen C. Chung was an employee of Juno Therapeutics, a Celgene Company, prior to the acquisition of Celgene by Bristol Myers Squibb.

show abstract

“… 45 Such oral regimens are reportedly more convenient, improving adherence, reducing the cost associated with the number of medical visits per month, time spent in travel, waiting, and receiving treatment that non-oral therapies require. 46 Increases in drug costs associated with the uptake of XVd are partially offset by lower secondary therapy, routine healthcare, and mortality costs. For example, the addition of selinexor to Vd is associated with significantly reduced rates of any grade and Grade ≥2 PN, common with higher bortezomib dose regimens, which is associated with higher costs and healthcare resource utilization in patients with MM.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

US Budget Impact Model for Selinexor, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

Dolph¹,

Tremblay²,

Leong³

2021

CEOR

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose To estimate the budget impact of selinexor, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (XVd) in patients with previously treated multiple myeloma (MM) from the perspective of a private third-party payer and Medicare in the US. Methods The introduction of XVd as an option for patients with previously treated MM compared to no introduction of XVd was considered from a private third-party US payer (with 1,000,000 members) and a Medicare perspective in one-year increments for 3 years. Total annual treatment costs were calculated as the sum of drug costs, costs of treating serious treatment emergent adverse events (grade ≥3), ongoing best supportive care costs, and mortality costs. Results The absolute budget impact (Millions, USD) of including XVd from a private third-party payer plan perspective was $0.06, $0.07, $0.08 and $0.22 for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. The relative budget impact of including XVd was 0.33%, 0.40%, 0.43%, and 0.38% for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. This translated to a per member per month (PMPM) budget impact of $0.005, $0.006, $0.007, and $0.006 (USD), for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. From a Medicare perspective, the absolute budget impact (Millions, USD) of including XVd was $29.68, $36.62, $39.42 and $105.72 for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. The relative budget impact of including XVd was 0.33%, 0.40%, 0.43%, and 0.38% percent for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. This translated to a PMPM budget impact of $0.041, $0.051, $0.054, and $0.049 (USD), for years 1, 2, 3, and overall, respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed general consistency with the base-case findings. Conclusion Understanding the potential budget impact of new therapies in MM is vital for payers to manage spending and assess treatment value. The introduction of XVd presents a manageable budget impact for a third-party US payer and Medicare.

show abstract

Patient-Reported Factors in Treatment Satisfaction in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM)

Cited by 31 publications

References 33 publications

Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Routine Clinical Practice: Effectiveness in Relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma

Ixazomib-Lenalidomide-Dexamethasone in Routine Clinical Practice: Effectiveness in Relapsed/refractory Multiple Myeloma

Access to Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Cell Therapy for Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma

US Budget Impact Model for Selinexor, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone for the Treatment of Previously Treated Multiple Myeloma

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About