Patients with multiple myeloma are generally older and vary in fitness levels, which may influence the clinical benefit of treatment. Patients from the large, phase 3 FIRST trial in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) were retrospectively investigated to determine outcomes based on frailty using scores for age, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), instead of the EQ-5D quality-of-life questionnaire, as previously reported. ECOG PS (n = 1618) was investigated in frailty groups: frail (49%) and nonfrail (51%). Frail patients experienced worse progression-free and overall survival vs nonfrail patients. Prognostic assessment was improved when combining frailty and International Staging System stage (I/II vs III). Frail patients had a higher risk of developing grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events. Treatment effects observed in the FIRST trial were confirmed per frailty group and per frailty and ISS group. The use of this ECOG PS-containing frailty scale as a predictive measure of clinical outcomes in patients with transplant-ineligible NDMM is supported by data from the FIRST trial. This score, based on age, CCI, and ECOG PS, can be easily replicated and may help design future myeloma studies in frail or nonfrail elderly patients.

The randomized pivotal phase III FIRST trial (Frontline Investigation of lenalidomide/dexamethasone [Rev/Dex] versus Standard Thalidomide; IFM 2007-01/ MM-020; clinicaltrials.gov identifier: 00689936; EudraCT No. 2007-004823-39) compared the efficacy and safety of Rd, administered continuously until progressive disease (PD) or for a fixed 18-month duration (Rd18), with MPT given for 18 months in NDMM patients who were aged 65 years or over, or who were aged under 65 years and ineligible for stem cell transplantation. Continuous Rd showed improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) benefit at interim analysis compared with MPT. 19 Although extending survival is clearly the ultimate treatment ©2015 Ferrata Storti Foundation. This is an open-access paper. doi:10.3324/haematol.2014 The online version of this article has a Supplementary Appendix. Manuscript received on November 14, 2014. Manuscript accepted on March 6, 2015 We compared the health-related quality-of-life of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma aged over 65 years or transplant-ineligible in the pivotal, phase III FIRST trial. Patients received: i) continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone until disease progression; ii) fixed cycles of lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone for 18 months; or iii) fixed cycles of melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide for 18 months. Data were collected using the validated questionnaires (QLQ-MY20, QLQ-C30, and EQ-5D). The analysis focused on the EQ-5D utility value and six domains pre-selected for their perceived clinical relevance. Lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone, and melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide improved patients' health-related quality-of-life from baseline over the duration of the study across all pre-selected domains of the QLQ-C30 and EQ-5D. In the QLQ-MY20, lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone demonstrated a significantly greater reduction in the Disease Symptoms domain compared with melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide at Month 3, and significantly lower scores for QLQ-MY20 Side Effects of Treatment at all post-baseline assessments except Month 18. Linear mixed-model repeatedmeasures analyses confirmed the results observed in the cross-sectional analysis. Continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone delays disease progression versus melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide and has been associated with a clinically meaningful improvement in health-related quality-of-life. These results further establish continuous lenalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone as a new standard of care for initial therapy of myeloma by demonstrating superior health-related quality-of-life during treatment, compared with melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide.Health-related quality-of-life in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the FIRST trial: lenalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone versus melphalan, prednisone, thalidomide [20][21][22][23] In this population, treatment objectives should be to improve disease management by delaying disease progression, optimizing re...

POM-d may be a cost-effective treatment option relative to DARA or CAR in heavily pretreated patients with RRMM in the US.

The growing number of disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) for patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and the high acquisition costs of these DMTs are likely to increase the demand for information on their cost effectiveness. To improve the comparability and applicability of the findings from future cost-effectiveness analyses, it would be useful to have a clear understanding of the methodological challenges of modelling the cost effectiveness of DMTs in MS and the different approaches taken by such studies to date. In contrast to previous review studies, this review focuses on long-term time horizon (≥10 years) simulation-based cost-effectiveness analyses with homogeneous contexts of analysis (i.e. those with similar study objectives, comparators, and target populations) published over the past decade. By doing so, it provides a clearer picture of how modelling approaches taken in the existing studies truly differ across studies, and reveals major areas for improvement in conducting future cost-effectiveness analyses of DMTs for patients with MS.

Background:The 29-item Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale (MSIS-29) was developed to examine the impact of multiple sclerosis (MS) on physical and psychological functioning from a patient’s perspective.Objective:To determine the responder definition (RD) of the MSIS-29 physical impact subscale (PHYS) in a group of patients with relapsing–remitting MS (RRMS) participating in a clinical trial.Methods:Data from the SELECT trial comparing daclizumab high-yield process with placebo in patients with RRMS were used. Physical function was evaluated in SELECT using three patient-reported outcomes measures and the Expanded Disability Status Scale (EDSS). Anchor- and distribution-based methods were used to identify an RD for the MSIS-29.Results:Results across the anchor-based approach suggested MSIS-29 PHYS RD values of 6.91 (mean), 7.14 (median) and 7.50 (mode). Distribution-based RD estimates ranged from 6.24 to 10.40. An RD of 7.50 was selected as the most appropriate threshold for physical worsening based on corresponding changes in the EDSS (primary anchor of interest).Conclusion:These findings indicate that a ≥7.50 point worsening on the MSIS-29 PHYS is a reasonable and practical threshold for identifying patients with RRMS who have experienced a clinically significant change in the physical impact of MS.