Search

Background: To compare the response and safety of Ixazomib/Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone (IRd) and Bortezomib/Lenalidomide/Dexamethasone (VRd) treatment in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM). Methods: This was a single‐center retrospective analysis in Xiangtan Central Hospital. A total of 52 newly diagnosed MM patients from June 2019 to June 2021 were enrolled and divided into the IRd (n = 21) and VRd (n = 31) groups. After 4 cycles of chemotherapy, the best response and adverse events were recorded. Moreover, the progression‐free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated. Results: Patients in IRd group and VRd group showed similar PFS (Log‐rank p = 0.70), OS (Log‐rank p = 0.61) and overall response rate (83.87% vs 90.48%, p = 0.803). In addition, patients in VRd group showed lower Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scores (p = 0.047), and higher incidence of peripheral sensory neuropathy (0.00% vs 19.35%, p = 0.032) than that of patients in IRd group. Conclusion: Compared to VRd regimen, IRd had the similar efficacy, better safety, and may be more convenient for patients with poor basic condition for newly diagnosed MM. This study provides an insight for physicians to use IRd as first‐line treatment in MM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study analyzed the cost utility on the use of ixazomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (IRD), lenalidomide/dexamethasone (RD), bortezomib/thalidomide/dexamethasone (VTD), or bortezomib/dexamethasone (VD) for patients with refractory or relapsed multiple myeloma (rrMM). Patients' lifelong direct medical costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) are simulated by using the Markov model on the basis of the China's healthcare system. VTD, RD, and IRD are 0.12, 0.32, and 0.42 QALYs higher than VD, and $9401, $16,868, and $39,671 higher than those of VD in terms of lifelong cost. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios are 78,342, 52,713, and 94,455, respectively. IRD can extend the life years of patients with rrMM, improve the quality of life, and increase the cost of medical treatment. The use of VD has a comparative advantage of cost utility. For patients who cannot tolerate bortezomib or were drug-fast with first-line bortezomib, RD plan is another economical and effective strategy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety profile of ixazomib/lenalidomide/dexamethasone (IRd) in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) . Methods: This study comprising 14 medical centers in China included patients with relapsed/refractory MM who received at least. Ixazomib at an initial oral dose of 4 mg was administered. Seven patients had dose adjustment to 3 mg at the time of first dose. The lenalidomide doses were adjusted according to creatinine clearance rate. The efficacy and safety were evaluated every cycle. Results: In the study cohort of 74 patients, the median age was 65 years and 11 (14.9% ) patients received over three lines of therapy. Overall response rate (ORR) was 54.1% (40/74) , and 7 (9.5% ) , 14 (18.9% ) , and 19 (25.7% ) patients achieved stringent complete response or complete response, very good partial response, and partial response, respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 9.9 and 20 months, respectively. The median time to response was 1 month. The efficacy and survival outcome were similar to those reported in the Tourmaline-MM1 China Continuous Study. The ORR of patients refractory to bortezomib, lenalidomide, and bortezomib plus lenalidomide were 52.0% (13/25) , 57.1% (4/7) , and 33.3% (6/18) , respectively. The rate of grade 3-4 adverse events was 36.5% (27/74) . Common hematological toxicities were anemia, thrombocytopenia, lymphopenia, and neutropenia. Common non-hematological toxicities were fatigue, gastrointestinal symptoms, and infections. Two cases of grade 3 peripheral neuropathy were reported. The patients eligible for the Tourmaline-MM1 China Continuous Study had a higher ORR than the ineligible patients [77.8% (14/18) vs 46.4% (26/56) , P =0.020]. There was no difference in the rate of grade 3-4 adverse events [33.3% (6/18) vs 37.5% (21/56) , P =0.749]. Conclusion: The IRd regimen had good efficacy and acceptable toxicity in Chinese patients with relapsed/refractory MM.