Management of patients with multiple myeloma beyond the clinical-trial setting: understanding the balance between efficacy, safety and tolerability, and quality of life
- PMID: 33602913
- PMCID: PMC7891472
- DOI: 10.1038/s41408-021-00432-4
Management of patients with multiple myeloma beyond the clinical-trial setting: understanding the balance between efficacy, safety and tolerability, and quality of life
Abstract
Treatment options in multiple myeloma (MM) are increasing with the introduction of complex multi-novel-agent-based regimens investigated in randomized clinical trials. However, application in the real-world setting, including feasibility of and adherence to these regimens, may be limited due to varying patient-, treatment-, and disease-related factors. Furthermore, approximately 40% of real-world MM patients do not meet the criteria for phase 3 studies on which approvals are based, resulting in a lack of representative phase 3 data for these patients. Therefore, treatment decisions must be tailored based on additional considerations beyond clinical trial efficacy and safety, such as treatment feasibility (including frequency of clinic/hospital attendance), tolerability, effects on quality of life (QoL), and impact of comorbidities. There are multiple factors of importance to real-world MM patients, including disease symptoms, treatment burden and toxicities, ability to participate in daily activities, financial burden, access to treatment and treatment centers, and convenience of treatment. All of these factors are drivers of QoL and treatment satisfaction/compliance. Importantly, given the heterogeneity of MM, individual patients may have different perspectives regarding the most relevant considerations and goals of their treatment. Patient perspectives/goals may also change as they move through their treatment course. Thus, the 'efficacy' of treatment means different things to different patients, and treatment decision-making in the context of personalized medicine must be guided by an individual's composite definition of what constitutes the best treatment choice. This review summarizes the various factors of importance and practical issues that must be considered when determining real-world treatment choices. It assesses the current instruments, methodologies, and recent initiatives for analyzing the MM patient experience. Finally, it suggests options for enhancing data collection on patients and treatments to provide a more holistic definition of the effectiveness of a regimen in the real-world setting.
Conflict of interest statement
E.T.: Honoraria and research funding from Amgen and Sanofi; honoraria from BMS and Celgene; honoraria, travel expenses, and research funding from Genesis, Janssen, and Takeda. J.M.: Consultancy for Amgen, Celgene, GSK, Janssen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, and Takeda. R.H.: Consultancy, honoraria, membership on an entity’s board of directors or advisory committees and research funding for Janssen, Amgen, Celgene and Bristol-Myers Squibb; consultancy for AbbVie; consultancy and research funding for Novartis; consultancy, honoraria and membership on an entity’s Board of Directors or advisory committees for PharmaMar; consultancy, consultant or advisory relationship, honoraria, membership on an entity’s board of directors or advisory committees and research funding for Takeda. A.C.: Consultancy for Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Takeda, Antengene, and Secura Bio; advisory boards with Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Karyopharm, Sanofi, Seattle Genetics, Oncopeptides, GlaxoSmithKline, and Secura Bio; research funding from Janssen, Celgene, Novartis, Amgen, Pharmacyclics, Seattle Genetics, and Takeda. S.Z.: Research funding from and advisory boards for Takeda, Celgene, and Janssen. H.C.L.: Membership on an entity’s board of directors or advisory committees for Amgen, Sanofi, Celgene, Genentech, GlaxoSmithKline plc, Takeda, and Janssen; research funding from Takeda, Amgen, Janssen, Celgene, GlaxoSmithKline plc, and Daiichi Sankyo. M.V.M.: Personal fees from Takeda, Janssen, Amgen, Celgene, GSK, and Abbvie. A.L.: Advisory boards for Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; honoraria from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and GSK. K.R.: Takeda: honoraria, research funding; Amgen: honoraria; Janssen: honoraria; Celgene: honoraria, research funding; Adaptive Biotech: Honoraria; Oncopeptides: Honoraria. M.K.: Consultancy for Amgen, Janssen, Takeda, Celgene/BMS, GSK, Karyopharm, and Abbvie; institutional research funding from Janssen and Celgene/BMS; travel support from Janssen and Takeda. G.C.: Consultancy, honoraria, research funding and speakers bureau for Janssen, Takeda and Celgene; consultancy, honoraria and speakers bureau for Sanofi and Karyopharm. K.C.W.: Advisory boards for Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Adaptive Biotech, Celgene, Janssen, Juno, Takeda, Sanofi; honoraria from Amgen, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Celgene, Janssen, and Takeda; research funding from Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, and Sanofi. C.L.C.: Honoraria and research funding for Takeda; research funding for Janssen; consultancy, honoraria and research funding for Celgene. J.E. and A.P.: Employment, Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. S.Z.U.: Consultancy, patents & royalties, research funding and speakers bureau for Amgen, Celgene, Janssen and Takeda; patents & royalties and research funding for Array Biopharma and Pharmacyclics; consultancy and research funding for Bristol-Myers Squibb and Merck; patents & royalties, research funding and speakers bureau for Sanofi; consultancy for Skyline DX.
Figures


Similar articles
-
The future of Cochrane Neonatal.Early Hum Dev. 2020 Nov;150:105191. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105191. Epub 2020 Sep 12. Early Hum Dev. 2020. PMID: 33036834
-
Drivers of physician decision-making and patient perspectives across lines of therapy in multiple myeloma in the USA.Future Oncol. 2023 Jul;19(22):1549-1562. doi: 10.2217/fon-2023-0020. Epub 2023 Jun 7. Future Oncol. 2023. PMID: 37283044
-
Treatment-free interval as a metric of patient experience and a health outcome of value for advanced multiple myeloma: the case for the histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat, a next-generation novel agent.Expert Rev Hematol. 2017 Oct;10(10):933-939. doi: 10.1080/17474086.2017.1369399. Epub 2017 Sep 25. Expert Rev Hematol. 2017. PMID: 28885063
-
Interpreting clinical trial data in multiple myeloma: translating findings to the real-world setting.Blood Cancer J. 2018 Nov 9;8(11):109. doi: 10.1038/s41408-018-0141-0. Blood Cancer J. 2018. PMID: 30413684 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Opioids and the management of chronic severe pain in the elderly: consensus statement of an International Expert Panel with focus on the six clinically most often used World Health Organization Step III opioids (buprenorphine, fentanyl, hydromorphone, methadone, morphine, oxycodone).Pain Pract. 2008 Jul-Aug;8(4):287-313. doi: 10.1111/j.1533-2500.2008.00204.x. Epub 2008 May 23. Pain Pract. 2008. PMID: 18503626
Cited by
-
Unravelling Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Treatment in Real-World Practice in Spain: The CARINAE Study.Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024 Sep 26;17(10):1272. doi: 10.3390/ph17101272. Pharmaceuticals (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39458913 Free PMC article.
-
An Individualized Exercise Intervention for People with Multiple Myeloma-Study Protocol of a Randomized Waitlist-Controlled Trial.Curr Oncol. 2022 Feb 7;29(2):901-923. doi: 10.3390/curroncol29020077. Curr Oncol. 2022. PMID: 35200576 Free PMC article.
-
Testing for SARS-CoV-2: lessons learned and current use cases.Clin Microbiol Rev. 2024 Jun 13;37(2):e0007223. doi: 10.1128/cmr.00072-23. Epub 2024 Mar 15. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2024. PMID: 38488364 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Patient Perspectives on Social and Identity Factors Affecting Multiple Myeloma Care: Barriers and Opportunities.Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Aug 9;12(16):1587. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12161587. Healthcare (Basel). 2024. PMID: 39201146 Free PMC article.
-
Balancing the Risk of Cardiotoxicity Outcomes in Treatment Selection for Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Multicenter Evaluation of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRd) Versus Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (KRd).EJHaem. 2025 Apr 28;6(3):e70038. doi: 10.1002/jha2.70038. eCollection 2025 Jun. EJHaem. 2025. PMID: 40297748 Free PMC article.
References
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical