Comparison of Outcomes and Utilization of Therapy in Multiple Myeloma Patients in the USA and Alberta, Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Background: Multiple myeloma (MM) is a common global hematologic malignancy, contributing to substantial morbidity and mortality amongst diagnosed patients. Novel agents - bortezomib (Btz) and lenalidomide (Len) have changed dramatically over the past 20 years and have contributed to improvements in survival and long term outcomes for MM patients. Research has shown that there are differences in how MM is treated globally. We sought to evaluate the differences in outcomes and therapies received amongst patients treated in Alberta (AB), Canada, and in the United States (USA). Methods: Adult patients with multiple myeloma over the age of 65, diagnosed between 2007 and 2013, were identified. Data sources used for AB was the CA National Ambulatory Care Reporting System (NACRS), Discharge Abstracts Database (DAD), and CT records from AB Health Services. For the USA we used the SEER-Medicare database; MM diagnosis was extracted using a previously published algorithm. We extracted demographic data, novel agent utilization in the first year, comorbidities, and survival. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to determine survival. Results: Patients meeting study criteria included 4,330 MM patients in the USA and 793 patients with MM in AB. The median age at diagnosis in the USA and AB was 76.6 and 75 years, respectively. Median Charlson Comorbidity index in the USA and AB was 1, and 0, respectively. With respect to frontline therapies, both AB and USA had increasing utilization of Btz and Len from 2007-2013 (Figure), with Btz use more common in AB, while Len use was more common in the US. The proportion of all patients who did not receive any therapy in the first year of diagnosis fell dramatically from 2007 to 2013 in both AB (from 86% to 25%) and the USA (from 56% to 40%). Receipt of autologous stem cell transplant was uncommon in this older cohort, in only 3.2% of MM patients in AB and 4% of patients in the US. Similar proportions of patients in the USA and AB received radiotherapy in the first year (19% US, 25% AB). Median overall survival was improved in AB at 2.8 years, (95% CI 2.6-3.2 yrs), compared with the USA, 2.2 yrs (95% CI 2.1 - 2.30, as was 5 year survival - 30% in the USA, compared with 34% in AB. Conclusions: In this cross-country comparison of MM patients in the USA and AB both treated in a single-payer health care system - AB Health Services and Medicare - novel agents are a common treatment in the first year of diagnosis. We demonstrate similar uptake of novel agents Btz and Len over 2007-2013, however, Btz utilization was higher in AB from 2011-2013, while Len was more often used in the USA from 2011-2013. Median overall survival was better in AB (2.8 years) compared with USA (2.3 years), as was long term survival at 5 years. The differences in utilization of therapy and survival are possibly related to variability in healthcare delivery systems, burden of comorbidities in these populations, and approval of anti-MM therapy over time, and require further study to better understand reasons for differential outcomes. Figure Disclosures Cowan: Sanofi: Consultancy; Cellectar: Consultancy; Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding. Ramsey:AstraZeneca: Other: Personal Fees.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,008 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».