AI Chat Paper
Note: Please note that the following content is generated by AMiner AI. SciOpen does not take any responsibility related to this content.
{{lang === 'zh_CN' ? '文章概述' : 'Summary'}}
{{lang === 'en_US' ? '中' : 'Eng'}}
Chat more with AI
PDF (1 MB)
Collect
Submit Manuscript AI Chat Paper
Show Outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Outline
Show full outline
Hide outline
Original Article | Open Access

Current treatment paradigm and survival outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in China: a retrospective multicenter study

Huishou Fan1Weida Wang2Ya Zhang3Jianxiang Wang1Tao Cheng1Lugui Qiu1Xin Wang3 ( )Zhongjun Xia2( )Gang An1 ( )
State Key Laboratory of Experimental Hematology, National Clinical Research Center for Blood Diseases, Haihe Laboratory of Cell Ecosystem, Institute of Hematology & Blood Diseases Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College, Tianjin 300020, China
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou 510060, China
Department of Hematology, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong First Medical University, Jinan 250021, China
Show Author Information

Abstract

Objective

Evidence on the prognostic value of autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) and minimal residual disease (MRD) dynamics of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) in China is limited. Our objective in the current study was to understand the current care paradigm and outcomes of these patients.

Methods

This longitudinal cohort study used historical data from three top-tier hematologic disease care hospitals that contributed to the National Longitudinal Cohort of Hematological Diseases-Multiple Myeloma. Treatment regimens [proteasome inhibitor (PI)-, immunomodulatory drug (IMiD)-, PI+IMiD-based, and conventional], post-induction response, ASCT and MRD status, and survival outcomes [progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS)] were evaluated.

Results

In total, 454 patients with NDMM were included (median age, 57 years; 59.0% males) with a median follow-up of 58.7 months. The overall response rate was 91.0%, 83.9%, 90.6%, and 60.9% for PI-, IMiD-, PI+IMiD-based, and conventional regimens, respectively. Patients with ASCT during first-line therapy (26.2%) had a longer PFS and OS than patients who did not receive ASCT [median PFS, 42.9 vs. 21.2 months, P < 0.001; median OS, not reached (NR) vs. 65.8 months, P < 0.001]. The median OS was NR, 71.5, and 56.6 months among patients with sustained MRD negativity, loss of MRD negativity, and persistent MRD, respectively (P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed that the lactic dehydrogenase level, International Staging System stage, extra-medullary disease, and upfront ASCT were independent factors in predicting OS among NDMM patients.

Conclusions

Our study showed that novel agent-based regimens, first-line ASCT, and sustained MRD negativity were associated with a superior outcome for patients with NDMM in China (Identifier: NCT04645199).

Electronic Supplementary Material

Download File(s)
cbm-20-1-77_ESM.pdf (2.3 MB)

References

1

Raab MS, Podar K, Breitkreutz I, Richardson PG, Anderson KC. Multiple myeloma. Lancet. 2009; 374: 324-39.

2

Palumbo A, Anderson K. Multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 1046-60.

3

Liu J, Liu W, Mi L, Zeng X, Cai C, Ma J, et al. Incidence and mortality of multiple myeloma in China, 2006-2016: an analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. J Hematol Oncol. 2019; 12: 136.

4

Cowan AJ, Allen C, Barac A, Basaleem H, Bensenor I, Curado MP, et al. Global burden of multiple myeloma: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. JAMA Oncol. 2018; 4: 1221-7.

5

Sant M, Minicozzi P, Mounier M, Anderson LA, Brenner H, Holleczek B, et al. Survival for haematological malignancies in Europe between 1997 and 2008 by region and age: results of EUROCARE-5, a population-based study. Lancet Oncol. 2014; 15: 931-42.

6

Engelhardt M, Terpos E, Kleber M, Gay F, Wäsch R, Morgan G, et al. European Myeloma Network recommendations on the evaluation and treatment of newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma. Haematologica. 2014; 99: 232-42.

7

Blimark CH, Turesson I, Genell A, Ahlberg L, Björkstrand B, Carlson K, et al. Outcome and survival of myeloma patients diagnosed 2008-2015. Real-world data on 4904 patients from the Swedish Myeloma Registry. Haematologica. 2018; 103: 506-13.

8

de Mel S, Lim SH, Tung ML, Chng WJ. Implications of heterogeneity in multiple myeloma. Biomed Res Int. 2014; 2014: 232546.

9

Allemani C, Matsuda T, Di Carlo V, Harewood R, Matz M, Niksic M, et al. Global surveillance of trends in cancer survival 2000-14 (CONCORD-3): analysis of individual records for 37 513 025 patients diagnosed with one of 18 cancers from 322 population-based registries in 71 countries. Lancet. 2018; 391: 1023-75.

10

Barlogie B, Mitchell A, van Rhee F, Epstein J, Morgan GJ, Crowley J. Curing myeloma at last: defining criteria and providing the evidence. Blood. 2014; 124: 3043-51.

11

Pawlyn C, Morgan GJ. Evolutionary biology of high-risk multiple myeloma. Nat Rev Cancer. 2017; 17: 543-56.

12

Durie BG, Harousseau JL, Miguel JS, Bladé J, Barlogie B, Anderson K, et al. International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2006; 20: 1467-73.

13

Kumar S, Paiva B, Anderson KC, Durie B, Landgren O, Moreau P, et al. International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. Lancet Oncol. 2016; 17: e328-46.

14

Ding H, Xu J, Lin Z, Huang J, Wang F, Yang Y, et al. Minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma: current status. Biomark Res. 2021; 9: 75.

15
Clinicaltrials.gov. National Longitudinal Cohort of Hematological Diseases[EB/OL]. https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04645199.
16

An G, Yan Y, Xu Y, Mao X, Liu J, Fan H, et al. Monitoring the cytogenetic architecture of minimal residual plasma cells indicates therapy-induced clonal selection in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2020; 34: 578-88.

17

Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, Lokhorst HM, Goldschmidt H, Rosinol L, et al. Revised international staging system for multiple myeloma: a report from International Myeloma Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2015; 33: 2863-9.

18

He J, Yang L, Han X, Zheng G, Zheng W, Wei G, et al. The choice of regimens based on bortezomib for patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. PLoS One. 2014; 9: e99174.

19

Lu J, Lu J, Chen W, Huo Y, Huang X, Hou J, et al. Clinical features and treatment outcome in newly diagnosed Chinese patients with multiple myeloma: results of a multicenter analysis. Blood Cancer J. 2014; 4: e239.

20

Geng C, Liu N, Yang G, Liu A, Leng Y, Wang H, et al. Retrospective analysis of 264 multiple myeloma patients. Oncol Lett. 2013; 5: 707-13.

21

Goldschmidt H, Ashcroft J, Szabo Z, Garderet L. Navigating the treatment landscape in multiple myeloma: which combinations to use and when? Ann Hematol. 2019; 98: 1-18.

22

Moreau P, Richardson PG, Cavo M, Orlowski RZ, San Miguel JF, Palumbo A, et al. Proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma: 10 years later. Blood. 2012; 120: 947-59.

23

Gandolfi S, Laubach JP, Hideshima T, Chauhan D, Anderson KC, Richardson PG. The proteasome and proteasome inhibitors in multiple myeloma. Cancer Metastasis Rev. 2017; 36: 561-84.

24

Al Hamed R, Bazarbachi AH, Malard F, Harousseau JL, Mohty M. Current status of autologous stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. Blood Cancer J. 2019; 9: 44.

25

Morè S, Corvatta L, Manieri VM, Saraceni F, Scortechini I, Mancini G, et al. Autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: where are we and where do we want to go? Cells. 2022; 11(4): 606.

26

Harousseau JL, Moreau P. Autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation for multiple myeloma. N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 2645-54.

27

Mikhael J, Ismaila N, Cheung MC, Costello C, Dhodapkar MV, Kumar S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma: ASCO and CCO Joint Clinical Practice Guideline. J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37: 1228-63.

28

Dimopoulos MA, Moreau P, Terpos E, Mateos MV, Zweegman S, Cook G, et al. Multiple myeloma: EHA-ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2021; 32: 309-22.

29

van de Velde H, Londhe A, Ataman O, Johns HL, Hill S, Landers E, et al. Association between complete response and outcomes in transplant-eligible myeloma patients in the era of novel agents. Eur J Haematol. 2017; 98: 269-79.

30

Xu LP, Lu PH, Wu DP, Sun ZM, Liu QF, Han MZ, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation activity in China 2019: a report from the Chinese Blood and Marrow Transplantation Registry Group. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021; 56: 2940-7.

31

Xu LP, Wu DP, Han MZ, Huang H, Liu QF, Liu DH, et al. A review of hematopoietic cell transplantation in China: data and trends during 2008-2016. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2017; 52: 1512-8.

32

Bergin K, Wellard C, Augustson B, Cooke R, Blacklock H, Harrison SJ, et al. Real-world utilisation of ASCT in multiple myeloma (MM): a report from the Australian and New Zealand myeloma and related diseases registry (MRDR). Bone Marrow Transplant. 2021; 56: 2533-43.

33

Pandya C, Hashmi S, Khera N, Gertz MA, Dispenzieri A, Hogan W, et al. Cost-effectiveness analysis of early vs. late autologous stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Clin Transplant. 2014; 28: 1084-91.

34

San-Miguel J, Avet-Loiseau H, Paiva B, Kumar S, Dimopoulos MA, Facon T, et al. Sustained minimal residual disease negativity in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma and the impact of daratumumab in MAIA and ALCYONE. Blood. 2022; 139: 492-501.

35

Bianchi G. Sustained minimal residual disease in myeloma. Blood. 2022; 139: 469-71.

36

Avet-Loiseau H, San-Miguel J, Casneuf T, Iida S, Lonial S, Usmani SZ, et al. Evaluation of sustained minimal residual disease negativity with daratumumab-combination regimens in relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma: analysis of POLLUX and CASTOR. J Clin Oncol. 2021; 39: 1139-49.

37

Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Campion L, Caillot D, Hulin C, Marit G, et al. Long-term analysis of the IFM 99 trials for myeloma: cytogenetic abnormalities[t(4;14), del(17p), 1q gains] play a major role in defining long-term survival. J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 1949-52.

38

Avet-Loiseau H, Attal M, Moreau P, Charbonnel C, Garban F, Hulin C, et al. Genetic abnormalities and survival in multiple myeloma: the experience of the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome. Blood. 2007; 109: 3489-95.

39

Munshi NC, Avet-Loiseau H, Anderson KC, Neri P, Paiva B, Samur M, et al. A large meta-analysis establishes the role of MRD negativity in long-term survival outcomes in patients with multiple myeloma. Blood Adv. 2020; 4: 5988-99.

40

Li H, Li F, Zhou X, Mei J, Song P, An Z, et al. Achieving minimal residual disease-negative by multiparameter flow cytometry may ameliorate a poor prognosis in MM patients with high-risk cytogenetics: a retrospective single-center analysis. Ann Hematol. 2019; 98: 1185-95.

Cancer Biology & Medicine
Pages 77-87
Cite this article:
Fan H, Wang W, Zhang Y, et al. Current treatment paradigm and survival outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in China: a retrospective multicenter study. Cancer Biology & Medicine, 2023, 20(1): 77-87. https://doi.org/10.20892/j.issn.2095-3941.2022.0612

149

Views

5

Downloads

1

Crossref

2

Web of Science

3

Scopus

Altmetrics

Received: 04 October 2022
Accepted: 23 November 2022
Published: 12 January 2023
©2023 Cancer Biology & Medicine.

Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Return