Jing Luo1, Joshua J Gagne2, Joan Landon2, Jerry Avorn2, Aaron S Kesselheim2. 1. Program on Regulation Therapeutics and Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA. Electronic address: jluo1@partners.org. 2. Program on Regulation Therapeutics and Law (PORTAL), Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of thalidomide and lenalidomide in the treatment of multiple myeloma has not been established. We conducted an observational cohort study of multiple myeloma patients receiving either thalidomide or lenalidomide in routine care in the United States of America to assess their comparative survival and rates of peripheral neuropathy. METHODS: Myeloma patients were identified and followed using administrative claims data from a large national health insurance provider (UnitedHealth). Patients were eligible if they initiated treatment with either lenalidomide or thalidomide between 2004 and 2013. Propensity score stratified Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for death and new-onset peripheral neuropathy (defined by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision codes or a new prescription intended to treat neuropathic pain). FINDINGS: Our cohort included 1264 myeloma patients who initiated either thalidomide or lenalidomide. Among 406 new users of thalidomide, 142 (35%) developed peripheral neuropathy during a mean 499 person-days of follow-up. Among 858 new users of lenalidomide, 244 (29%) developed neuropathy during 587 person-days. Compared with thalidomide initiators, lenalidomide initiators had a reduced risk of peripheral neuropathy (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.92). We found no difference in rates of death (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.71-1.41). INTERPRETATION: Our results agree with the findings of recently published trials suggesting that thalidomide and lenalidomide are equivalent with respect to survival outcomes but different with respect to neurotoxicity in clinical practice settings.
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of thalidomide and lenalidomide in the treatment of multiple myeloma has not been established. We conducted an observational cohort study of multiple myelomapatients receiving either thalidomide or lenalidomide in routine care in the United States of America to assess their comparative survival and rates of peripheral neuropathy. METHODS:Myelomapatients were identified and followed using administrative claims data from a large national health insurance provider (UnitedHealth). Patients were eligible if they initiated treatment with either lenalidomide or thalidomide between 2004 and 2013. Propensity score stratified Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for death and new-onset peripheral neuropathy (defined by International Classification of Disease, Ninth Revision codes or a new prescription intended to treat neuropathic pain). FINDINGS: Our cohort included 1264 myelomapatients who initiated either thalidomide or lenalidomide. Among 406 new users of thalidomide, 142 (35%) developed peripheral neuropathy during a mean 499 person-days of follow-up. Among 858 new users of lenalidomide, 244 (29%) developed neuropathy during 587 person-days. Compared with thalidomide initiators, lenalidomide initiators had a reduced risk of peripheral neuropathy (HR 0.71, 95% CI: 0.56-0.92). We found no difference in rates of death (HR 1.00, 95% CI: 0.71-1.41). INTERPRETATION: Our results agree with the findings of recently published trials suggesting that thalidomide and lenalidomide are equivalent with respect to survival outcomes but different with respect to neurotoxicity in clinical practice settings.
Authors: Graham H Jackson; Faith E Davies; Charlotte Pawlyn; David A Cairns; Alina Striha; Corinne Collett; Anna Waterhouse; John R Jones; Bhuvan Kishore; Mamta Garg; Cathy D Williams; Kamaraj Karunanithi; Jindriska Lindsay; David Allotey; Salim Shafeek; Matthew W Jenner; Gordon Cook; Nigel H Russell; Martin F Kaiser; Mark T Drayson; Roger G Owen; Walter M Gregory; Gareth J Morgan; Uk Ncri Haematological Oncology Clinical Studies Group Journal: Haematologica Date: 2021-07-01 Impact factor: 9.941