Tina Bech Olesen1, Ina Trolle Andersen2, Anne Gulbech Ording2, Vera Ehrenstein2, Anouchka Seesaghur3, Carsten Helleberg4, Trine Silkjær5, Rohini K Hernandez6, Daniela Niepel7, Niels Abildgaard8,9. 1. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus University, Olof Palmes Allé 43, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. tiaoes@rkkp.dk. 2. Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus University, Olof Palmes Allé 43, 8200, Aarhus, Denmark. 3. Centre for Observational Research, Amgen Ltd., Uxbridge, England. 4. Department of Haematology, Herlev Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark. 5. Department of Haematology, Aarhus University Hospital, Aarhus, Denmark. 6. Center for Observational Research, Amgen, Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, USA. 7. Amgen Europe GmbH, Rotkreuz, Switzerland. 8. Haematology Research Unit, Department of Haematology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark. 9. Department of Clinical Research, University of Southern Denmark, Odense, Denmark.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To describe use of bisphosphonates in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in Denmark. METHODS: Using data from the Danish National Multiple Myeloma Registry, we conducted a population-based cohort study. Among patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma from 2005 to 2015, we examined use of bisphosphonates at first- and at progression/second-line anti-myeloma treatment overall, by patient characteristics, and myeloma complications. RESULTS: Of 2947 patients starting first-line anti-myeloma treatment, 2207 patients (74.9%) received bisphosphonates. During a median follow-up of 27.6 (quartiles, 10.6-52.5) months, disease progression post-first-line treatment was recorded in 1546 patients, of whom 1065 (68.9%) were treated with bisphosphonates. Altogether, 80.9% of patients with and 37.6% of patients without myeloma bone disease were treated with bisphosphonates at first line and 73.0% and 42.7%, respectively, at progression/second line. Moreover, the proportion of patients treated with bisphosphonates decreased with increasing severity of renal impairment at first and at progression/second-line treatment. CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients treated with bisphosphonates as part of first- and second-line anti-myeloma treatment increased with presence of myeloma bone disease and decreased by presence and severity of renal impairment. Overall, 25% of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients had no record of bisphosphonate treatment, potentially indicating an unmet need.
PURPOSE: To describe use of bisphosphonates in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in Denmark. METHODS: Using data from the Danish National Multiple Myeloma Registry, we conducted a population-based cohort study. Among patients newly diagnosed with multiple myeloma from 2005 to 2015, we examined use of bisphosphonates at first- and at progression/second-line anti-myeloma treatment overall, by patient characteristics, and myeloma complications. RESULTS: Of 2947 patients starting first-line anti-myeloma treatment, 2207 patients (74.9%) received bisphosphonates. During a median follow-up of 27.6 (quartiles, 10.6-52.5) months, disease progression post-first-line treatment was recorded in 1546 patients, of whom 1065 (68.9%) were treated with bisphosphonates. Altogether, 80.9% of patients with and 37.6% of patients without myeloma bone disease were treated with bisphosphonates at first line and 73.0% and 42.7%, respectively, at progression/second line. Moreover, the proportion of patients treated with bisphosphonates decreased with increasing severity of renal impairment at first and at progression/second-line treatment. CONCLUSION: The proportion of patients treated with bisphosphonates as part of first- and second-line anti-myeloma treatment increased with presence of myeloma bone disease and decreased by presence and severity of renal impairment. Overall, 25% of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients had no record of bisphosphonate treatment, potentially indicating an unmet need.
Authors: S Vincent Rajkumar; Meletios A Dimopoulos; Antonio Palumbo; Joan Blade; Giampaolo Merlini; María-Victoria Mateos; Shaji Kumar; Jens Hillengass; Efstathios Kastritis; Paul Richardson; Ola Landgren; Bruno Paiva; Angela Dispenzieri; Brendan Weiss; Xavier LeLeu; Sonja Zweegman; Sagar Lonial; Laura Rosinol; Elena Zamagni; Sundar Jagannath; Orhan Sezer; Sigurdur Y Kristinsson; Jo Caers; Saad Z Usmani; Juan José Lahuerta; Hans Erik Johnsen; Meral Beksac; Michele Cavo; Hartmut Goldschmidt; Evangelos Terpos; Robert A Kyle; Kenneth C Anderson; Brian G M Durie; Jesus F San Miguel Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-10-26 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: R N Pearse; E M Sordillo; S Yaccoby; B R Wong; D F Liau; N Colman; J Michaeli; J Epstein; Y Choi Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2001-09-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Shaji K Kumar; S Vincent Rajkumar; Angela Dispenzieri; Martha Q Lacy; Suzanne R Hayman; Francis K Buadi; Steven R Zeldenrust; David Dingli; Stephen J Russell; John A Lust; Philip R Greipp; Robert A Kyle; Morie A Gertz Journal: Blood Date: 2007-11-01 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Robert A Kyle; Morie A Gertz; Thomas E Witzig; John A Lust; Martha Q Lacy; Angela Dispenzieri; Rafael Fonseca; S Vincent Rajkumar; Janice R Offord; Dirk R Larson; Matthew E Plevak; Terry M Therneau; Philip R Greipp Journal: Mayo Clin Proc Date: 2003-01 Impact factor: 7.616
Authors: Erming Tian; Fenghuang Zhan; Ronald Walker; Erik Rasmussen; Yupo Ma; Bart Barlogie; John D Shaughnessy Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-12-25 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: W J Chng; A Dispenzieri; C-S Chim; R Fonseca; H Goldschmidt; S Lentzsch; N Munshi; A Palumbo; J S Miguel; P Sonneveld; M Cavo; S Usmani; B G M Durie; H Avet-Loiseau Journal: Leukemia Date: 2013-08-26 Impact factor: 11.528
Authors: S K Kumar; A Dispenzieri; M Q Lacy; M A Gertz; F K Buadi; S Pandey; P Kapoor; D Dingli; S R Hayman; N Leung; J Lust; A McCurdy; S J Russell; S R Zeldenrust; R A Kyle; S V Rajkumar Journal: Leukemia Date: 2013-10-25 Impact factor: 11.528