[Multiple myeloma: response to treatment and survival of patients according to the interim analysis of the Russian observational, retrospective-prospective, multicenter cohort study (MULTISPECT)].

Aim: The primary objective of the interim analysis of the MULTISPECT study was to evaluate the short-term efficacy of the treatment and long-term outcomes in cohorts of primary and pretreated patients with multiple myeloma (MM) receiving treatment in actual clinical practice in various regions of the Russian Federation. Secondary objectives were a description of the main characteristics of patients; analysis of the most commonly used therapy regimens of the 1st and later lines and the sequence of their changes; evaluation of the response to therapy. Additional objectives included evaluation of the effect of the new COVID-19 coronavirus infection on the course of MM in patients.
Materials and Methods: The study is an observational retrospective-prospective multicenter cohort study. For its implementation, a structured database of patients with MM was used, provided by hematologists of the centers affiliated for the study.
Results: The study included 1,294 patients (cohort 1 806, cohort 2 488). In both cohorts, patients aged 6069 years were in the majority. 3 lines of therapy (L1, L2, L3) were used for cohort 1; in cohort 2, the 4th line of therapy was also used in 2 patients. The therapy regimens were analyzed for 290 (22.41%) of all patients in the study. Responses to therapy were analyzed for 214 patients of cohort 1 and 109 patients of cohort 2. Autologous and allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantations were carried out for a limited proportion of patients in both cohorts. At the end of the study and upon presentation of its results, the status of patients was the following: 96% of patients in cohort 1 and 89% in cohort 2 were alive. The therapy regimens in both cohorts were characterized by variability. The most commonly used regimens in each of the lines of therapy have been identified. The most used therapy regimen in patients with MM of both cohorts was the VCD-regime. Rd-regime in cohort 1 and RD-regime in cohort 2 were the second most frequent used regimens. In patients of both cohorts, the therapy regimens including Bortezomib were most often used.
Conclusion: The variety of therapy regimens used to treat MM in actual clinical practice may be due to the factors of availability of new medicines and updated recommendations for the treatment of the disease. Further, in the context of this study, a more detailed analysis of the efficacy of certain therapy regimens in the 1st and later lines on progression free survival and overall survival of MM patients should be carried out.