| 1. |
- Liwing, Johan, et al.
(författare)
-
Improved survival in myeloma patients : starting to close in on the gap between elderly patients and a matched normal population
- 2014
-
Ingår i: British Journal of Haematology. - : Wiley. - 0007-1048 .- 1365-2141. ; 164:5, s. 684-693
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- The outcome for multiple myeloma patients has improved since the introduction of bortezomib, thalidomide and lenalidomide. However, studies comparing new and conventional treatment include selected patient groups. We investigated consecutive patients (n = 1638) diagnosed in a defined period and compared survival with a gender- and age-matched cohort Swedish population (n = 9 340 682). Median overall survival for non-high-dose treated patients was 2.8 years. The use of bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide in first line therapy predicted a significantly longer overall survival (median 4.9 years) compared to conventional treatment (2.3 years). Among non-high-dose treated patients receiving at least 2 lines with bortezomib, thalidomide or lenalidomide, 69% and 63% have survived at 3 and 5 years as compared to 48% and 22% with conventional drugs and 88% and 79% in the matched cohort populations, respectively. The median overall survival in high-dose treated patients was 6.9 years. Of these patients, 84% survived at 3 years and 70% at 5 years as compared to 98% and 95% in the matched cohort population. Overall survival in the best non-high-dose treated outcome group is closing the gap with the matched cohort. Upfront use of new drugs is clearly better than waiting until later lines of treatment.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Partanen, Anu, et al.
(författare)
-
Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRD) Treatment with Cytogenetic Risk-Based Maintenance in Transplant-Eligible Myeloma: A Phase 2 Multicenter Study by the Nordic Myeloma Study Group
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Cancers. - : MDPI. - 2072-6694. ; 16:5
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Scarce data exist on double maintenance in transplant-eligible high-risk (HR) newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. This prospective phase 2 study enrolled 120 transplant-eligible NDMM patients. The treatment consisted of four cycles of ixazomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (IRD) induction plus autologous stem cell transplantation followed by IRD consolidation and cytogenetic risk-based maintenance therapy with lenalidomide + ixazomib (IR) for HR patients and lenalidomide (R) alone for NHR patients. The main endpoint of the study was undetectable minimal residual disease (MRD) with sensitivity of <10-5 by flow cytometry at any time, and other endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). We present the preplanned analysis after the last patient has been two years on maintenance. At any time during protocol treatment, 28% (34/120) had MRD < 10-5 at least once. At two years on maintenance, 66% of the patients in the HR group and 76% in the NHR group were progression-free (p = 0.395) and 36% (43/120) were CR or better, of which 42% (18/43) had undetectable flow MRD <10-5. Altogether 95% of the patients with sustained MRD <10-5, 82% of the patients who turned MRD-positive, and 61% of those with positive MRD had no disease progression at two years on maintenance (p < 0.001). To conclude, prolonged maintenance with all-oral ixazomib plus lenalidomide might improve PFS in HR patients.
|
|
| 4. |
- Wålinder, Göran, et al.
(författare)
-
Regional differences in treatment and outcome for myeloma patients in Sweden : A population based Swedish myeloma register study
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Cancer Reports. - : Wiley. - 2573-8348. ; 5:11
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: We wanted to evaluate if health care for multiple myeloma (MM) patients is equal in different regions of Sweden. Aim: To study differences in survival for MM depending on health care region and early use of modern treatment. Methods and results: Data from the Swedish Myeloma Register from patients diagnosed between 2008 and 2017 was used. Cohorts were defined by the six healthcare regions (labeled A–F) in Sweden and modern initial treatment was defined as including certain drug combinations. To adjust for time to treatment bias, survival analyses were performed also for patients alive 6 months after diagnosis. In all treated MM patients (n = 5326), we observed a superior overall survival (OS) for region A compared to all other regions (p <.01 for all respectively). After adjusting for time to treatment there was also a superior survival in the region with highest use of modern initial treatment (region A) compared to the regions defined in the study as having intermediate and low use (p <.01 for both). In patients receiving autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) a superior survival was observed for region A compared to all regions besides region B. Similar results were seen when adjusting for a time to treatment bias. In patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older and adjusted for time to treatment bias, a difference was noted only between region A and E (log rank p =.04, HR 1.2, CI 1.00–1.44, p =.06). In multivariate analyses including age, international staging system stage and time period of diagnosis, differences in survival remained for patients receiving ASCT between region A versus C, D, E and F (p =.01, p <.01, p <.01, p =.03). Conclusion: We observed a superior survival in region A for patients receiving ASCT. Explanations may be higher usage of modern initial treatment or regional residual confounding. For patients not receiving ASCT, 75 years or older, differences in survival could be adjusted for.
|
|
