Increased Healthcare Costs and Unmet Needs Identified in Triple-Class Exposed R/R Multiple Myeloma

Article

A real-world study found patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who were triple-class exposed had higher healthcare costs and unmet treatment needs.

Patients with triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who have received short-term heterogenous treatments are more likely to have higher healthcare costs and unmet medical needs, according to a study published in Future Medicine.

The median time from diagnosis to the new line of therapy was 41.0 months, and the median follow-up time was 6.2 months. The estimated median time to treatment discontinuation of 4.2 months. Investigators determined that the mean per-patient per-month multiple myeloma–related cost was $35,657 (95% CI, $32,104-$39,210). The most common treatment regimens were immunomodulatory drugs plus daratumumab (Darzalex; 18.2%), lenalidomide (Revlimid) or pomalidomide (Pomalyst) plus proteasome inhibitors (15.6%) including pomalidomide/carfilzomib (9.1%), and immunomodulatory monotherapy (11.0%), mostly pomalidomide (7.1%).

“This is the first study to describe [healthcare recurrence utilization] and healthcare costs associated with treatment of triple-class exposed patients with [relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma] in the US. The results of this study suggest that these patients have relatively poor outcomes despite receiving a diverse and relatively costly set of treatments, of which the most frequently used were combinations of immunomodulatory drugs with daratumumab,” investigators of the study wrote.

A total of 154 patients were included in the analysis and began a new line of therapy after having been triple-class exposed. Patients had a median age of 62 years, and 37% had autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) prior to index date. The mean number lines of therapy before receiving new lines of therapy were 3.6 months.

The mean all-cause hospitalization was 0.18 per-patient per-month (PPPM; 95% CI, 0.14-0.21), and the inpatient days were 1.44 (95% CI, 0.93-1.94) PPPM. The mean number of multiple myeloma–related hospital-related stays was 0.17 PPPM (95% CI, 0.14-0.21), and inpatients days were 1.43 (95% CI, 0.92-1.93) PPPM.

The mean all-cause total cost was $37,033 USD PPPM (95% CI, $33,454-$40,612); 96% of costs were related to myeloma treatment. Regardless of whether treatment was inpatient or outpatient, the mean cost PPPM with multiple myeloma treatment and administration was $18,238 (95% CI, $16,126-$20,350), and $1099 (95% CI, $728-$1470), respectfully.

The mean cost of ASCT was $364 (95% CI, $0-$906) PPPM. Two patients underwent ASCT during the index line of therapy, and the mean cost was $31,217. Investigators also reported that the mean cost of adverse effects and multiple myeloma–related complications was $10,278 (95% CI, $7754-$12,803) PPPM, and other services excluding treatment, administration, ASCT, and complications resulted in a mean cost of $5677 (95% CI, $4296-$7058). Overall, the mean in-patient cost was $8095 (95% CI, $5370-$10,820) and outpatient service cost was $19,429 (95% CI, $16,930-$21,928) per-patient per-month.

At 3 months, the expected total multiple myeloma–related healthcare cost per-patient was $122,400 (95% CI, $106,523-$140,081), at 6 months it was $201,603 (95% CI, $179,680-$224,231), at 9 months it was $273,438 (95% CI, $243,028-$303,727), and at 12 months it was $329,390 (95% CI, 286,694-375,060). Investigators noted that these estimates were based upon patients who were remaining on a health plan.

“Patients with [relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma] and triple-class exposure represent a small and difficult-to-treat patient population who receive heterogeneous treatment regimens, with no clear standard of care. The development of new agents is crucial to the management of this triple-class exposed patient population who experience a short duration of treatment and time to next therapy with high healthcare recurrence utilization] and costs in the US,” investigators concluded.

Reference

Madduri D, Hagiwara M, Parikh K, et al. Real-world treatment patterns, healthcare use and costs in triple-class exposed relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients in the USA. Future Oncol. 2021;17(5):503-515. doi:10.2217/fon-2020-1003

Newsletter

Stay up to date on recent advances in the multidisciplinary approach to cancer.

Recent Videos
The National ICE-T Conference may inspire future collaboration between community and academic oncologists in the management of different cancers.
Long-term toxicities like infections and secondary primary malignancies remain a concern when sequencing novel agents for those with multiple myeloma.
Management of adverse effects and access to cellular therapies among community oncologists represented key points of discussion in multiple myeloma.
“If you have a [patient in the] fourth or fifth line, [JNJ-5322] could be a valid drug of choice,” said Rakesh Popat, BSc, MBBS, MRCP, FRCPath, PhD.
Earlier treatment with daratumumab may be better tolerated for patients with pretreated MRD-negative multiple myeloma.
The trispecific antibody JNJ-5322 demonstrated superior efficacy vs approved agents in multiple myeloma in results shared at the 2025 EHA Congress.
The dual high-affinity binding observed with ISB 2001 may avoid resistance mechanisms reported with other BCMA-targeted therapies.
4 experts are featured in this series.
4 experts are featured in this series.
4 experts are featured in this series.
Related Content