Mark A Fiala1, Nicole C Foley2, Sonja Zweegman3, Ravi Vij2, Tanya M Wildes2. 1. Division of Oncology, Section of Bone Marrow Transplant & Leukemia, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States of America. Electronic address: mfiala@wustl.edu. 2. Division of Oncology, Section of Bone Marrow Transplant & Leukemia, Washington University School of Medicine, Saint Louis, MO, United States of America. 3. Department of Hematology, Asmterdam UMC, VU University, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Tremendous progress has been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma; however, the majority of this success has been demonstrated in younger patients. With 36% of patients >80 years-old at diagnosis, it is important to understand if older patients are receiving similar benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 2155 patients diagnosed with myeloma at age 80 or older in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare database from 2007 to 2013. A cohort of 2933 similar patients diagnosed with myeloma at age 70-79 was used for comparison using a difference-in-differences design. RESULTS: Only 51% of patients >80 years-old at diagnosis received systemic anti-myeloma treatment. Treatment was associated with a 26% decrease in hazard for death, independent of age, race, gender, poverty, comorbidities, and proxy measures of performance status. In the 70-79 cohort, treatment was associated with a 22% decrease in hazard for death. Based on the difference-in-differences design, there is no statistically significant difference in treatment benefit based on age cohort (p = .610). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-myeloma treatment produces a similar survival benefit among the oldest patients. The population over 80, when myeloma incidence peaks, is projected to triple over the next few decades. It is imperative that we continue to advance our understanding of the needs of this vulnerable subgroup of patients with myeloma.
OBJECTIVES: Tremendous progress has been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma; however, the majority of this success has been demonstrated in younger patients. With 36% of patients >80 years-old at diagnosis, it is important to understand if older patients are receiving similar benefits. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified 2155 patients diagnosed with myeloma at age 80 or older in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program (SEER)-Medicare database from 2007 to 2013. A cohort of 2933 similar patients diagnosed with myeloma at age 70-79 was used for comparison using a difference-in-differences design. RESULTS: Only 51% of patients >80 years-old at diagnosis received systemic anti-myeloma treatment. Treatment was associated with a 26% decrease in hazard for death, independent of age, race, gender, poverty, comorbidities, and proxy measures of performance status. In the 70-79 cohort, treatment was associated with a 22% decrease in hazard for death. Based on the difference-in-differences design, there is no statistically significant difference in treatment benefit based on age cohort (p = .610). CONCLUSIONS: Anti-myeloma treatment produces a similar survival benefit among the oldest patients. The population over 80, when myeloma incidence peaks, is projected to triple over the next few decades. It is imperative that we continue to advance our understanding of the needs of this vulnerable subgroup of patients with myeloma.
Authors: Mary-Kate Malecek; Mark Fiala; Mark Schroeder; James Dukeman; Armin Ghobadi; Keith Stockerl-Goldstein; Tanya Wildes; Ravi Vij Journal: Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk Date: 2018-06-21
Authors: Thierry Facon; Shaji Kumar; Torben Plesner; Robert Z Orlowski; Philippe Moreau; Nizar Bahlis; Supratik Basu; Hareth Nahi; Cyrille Hulin; Hang Quach; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Michael O'Dwyer; Aurore Perrot; Christopher P Venner; Katja Weisel; Joseph R Mace; Noopur Raje; Michel Attal; Mourad Tiab; Margaret Macro; Laurent Frenzel; Xavier Leleu; Tahamtan Ahmadi; Christopher Chiu; Jianping Wang; Rian Van Rampelbergh; Clarissa M Uhlar; Rachel Kobos; Ming Qi; Saad Z Usmani Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2019-05-30 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: María-Victoria Mateos; Meletios A Dimopoulos; Michele Cavo; Kenshi Suzuki; Andrzej Jakubowiak; Stefan Knop; Chantal Doyen; Paulo Lucio; Zsolt Nagy; Polina Kaplan; Ludek Pour; Mark Cook; Sebastian Grosicki; Andre Crepaldi; Anna M Liberati; Philip Campbell; Tatiana Shelekhova; Sung-Soo Yoon; Genadi Iosava; Tomoaki Fujisaki; Mamta Garg; Christopher Chiu; Jianping Wang; Robin Carson; Wendy Crist; William Deraedt; Huong Nguyen; Ming Qi; Jesus San-Miguel Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2017-12-12 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Philippe Moreau; Halyna Pylypenko; Sebastian Grosicki; Ievgenii Karamanesht; Xavier Leleu; Maria Grishunina; Grigoriy Rekhtman; Zvenyslava Masliak; Tadeusz Robak; Anna Shubina; Bertrand Arnulf; Martin Kropff; James Cavet; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Huaibao Feng; Suzette Girgis; Helgi van de Velde; William Deraedt; Jean-Luc Harousseau Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2011-04-18 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Heinz Ludwig; Brian G M Durie; Vanessa Bolejack; Ingemar Turesson; Robert A Kyle; Joan Blade; Rafael Fonseca; Meletios Dimopoulos; Kazuyuki Shimizu; Jesus San Miguel; Jan Westin; Jean-Luc Harousseau; Meral Beksac; Mario Boccadoro; Antonio Palumbo; Bart Barlogie; Chaim Shustik; Michele Cavo; Philip R Greipp; Douglas Joshua; Michel Attal; Pieter Sonneveld; John Crowley Journal: Blood Date: 2008-02-11 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: M Christine Bennink; Claudia A M Stege; Birgit I Lissenberg-Witte; Simone Oerlemans; Maarten R Seefat; Pieter Sonneveld; Sonja Zweegman Journal: Hemasphere Date: 2022-06-21
Authors: Hans C Lee; Sikander Ailawadhi; Cristina J Gasparetto; Sundar Jagannath; Robert M Rifkin; Brian G M Durie; Mohit Narang; Howard R Terebelo; Kathleen Toomey; James W Hardin; Lynne Wagner; James L Omel; Mazaher Dhalla; Liang Liu; Prashant Joshi; Rafat Abonour Journal: Blood Cancer J Date: 2021-07-23 Impact factor: 11.037