Disparities in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: recommendations from an interprofessional consensus panel.

IF 12.9 1区 医学 Q1 HEMATOLOGY
Rahul Banerjee, Yelak Biru, Craig E Cole, Beth Faiman, Shonali Midha, Sikander Ailawadhi
{"title":"Disparities in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: recommendations from an interprofessional consensus panel.","authors":"Rahul Banerjee, Yelak Biru, Craig E Cole, Beth Faiman, Shonali Midha, Sikander Ailawadhi","doi":"10.1038/s41408-024-01129-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Many studies have documented racial, socioeconomic, geographic, and other disparities for United States (US) patients with multiple myeloma pertaining to diagnosis and frontline management. In contrast, very little is known about disparities in the management of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) despite a plethora of novel treatment options. In this review, we discuss the manifestations of disparities in RRMM and strategies to mitigate their impact. Immunomodulatory drugs can create disparities on many axes, for example inappropriately low dosing due to Duffy-null status as well as time toxicity and financial toxicity from logistical hurdles for socioeconomically vulnerable patients. Access to myeloma expertise at high-volume centers is a critical consideration given the disconnect between how drugs like carfilzomib and dexamethasone are prescribed in trials versus optimized in real-world practice to lower toxicities. Disparities in chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy and bispecific antibody therapy span across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines in large part due to their limited availability outside of high-volume centers. Another insidious source of disparities is supportive care in RRMM, ranging from inadequate pain control in Black patients to limited primary care provider access in rural settings. We discuss the rationales and evidence base for several solutions aimed at mitigating these disparities: for example, (1) bidirectional co-management with community-based oncologists, (2) screening for risk factors based on social determinants of health, (3) strategies to build patient trust with regard to clinical trials, and (4) longitudinal access to a primary care provider. As the treatment landscape for RRMM continues to expand, these types of efforts by the field will help ensure that this landscape is equally accessible and traversable for all US patients.</p>","PeriodicalId":8989,"journal":{"name":"Blood Cancer Journal","volume":"14 1","pages":"149"},"PeriodicalIF":12.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11350150/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Blood Cancer Journal","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41408-024-01129-0","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEMATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Many studies have documented racial, socioeconomic, geographic, and other disparities for United States (US) patients with multiple myeloma pertaining to diagnosis and frontline management. In contrast, very little is known about disparities in the management of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) despite a plethora of novel treatment options. In this review, we discuss the manifestations of disparities in RRMM and strategies to mitigate their impact. Immunomodulatory drugs can create disparities on many axes, for example inappropriately low dosing due to Duffy-null status as well as time toxicity and financial toxicity from logistical hurdles for socioeconomically vulnerable patients. Access to myeloma expertise at high-volume centers is a critical consideration given the disconnect between how drugs like carfilzomib and dexamethasone are prescribed in trials versus optimized in real-world practice to lower toxicities. Disparities in chimeric antigen receptor T-cell therapy and bispecific antibody therapy span across racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic lines in large part due to their limited availability outside of high-volume centers. Another insidious source of disparities is supportive care in RRMM, ranging from inadequate pain control in Black patients to limited primary care provider access in rural settings. We discuss the rationales and evidence base for several solutions aimed at mitigating these disparities: for example, (1) bidirectional co-management with community-based oncologists, (2) screening for risk factors based on social determinants of health, (3) strategies to build patient trust with regard to clinical trials, and (4) longitudinal access to a primary care provider. As the treatment landscape for RRMM continues to expand, these types of efforts by the field will help ensure that this landscape is equally accessible and traversable for all US patients.

Abstract Image

复发性或难治性多发性骨髓瘤的差异:跨专业共识小组的建议。
许多研究记录了美国多发性骨髓瘤患者在诊断和一线治疗方面存在的种族、社会经济、地理和其他差异。相比之下,尽管新型治疗方案层出不穷,但人们对复发性/难治性多发性骨髓瘤(RRMM)治疗中的差异却知之甚少。在这篇综述中,我们将讨论 RRMM 中的差异表现以及减轻其影响的策略。免疫调节药物会造成许多方面的差异,例如,由于达菲无效状态而导致的不适当的低剂量,以及时间毒性和经济毒性,这些都是社会经济弱势患者面临的后勤障碍。考虑到卡非佐米(carfilzomib)和地塞米松(dexamethasone)等药物在试验中的处方与实际应用中为降低毒性而优化的处方之间的脱节,在高容量中心获得骨髓瘤专业知识是一个重要的考虑因素。嵌合抗原受体 T 细胞疗法和双特异性抗体疗法的差异跨越种族、民族和社会经济界限,这在很大程度上是由于这些疗法在高容量中心以外的可用性有限。RRMM的支持性治疗是造成差异的另一个隐患,从黑人患者疼痛控制不足到农村地区初级保健提供者有限等。我们讨论了旨在减少这些差异的几种解决方案的原理和证据基础:例如,(1)与社区肿瘤专家进行双向共同管理,(2)根据健康的社会决定因素筛查风险因素,(3)在临床试验方面建立患者信任的策略,以及(4)纵向获得初级保健提供者的服务。随着RRMM治疗范围的不断扩大,该领域所做的这些努力将有助于确保所有美国患者都能平等地获得和穿越这一领域。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
16.70
自引率
2.30%
发文量
153
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Blood Cancer Journal is dedicated to publishing high-quality articles related to hematologic malignancies and related disorders. The journal welcomes submissions of original research, reviews, guidelines, and letters that are deemed to have a significant impact in the field. While the journal covers a wide range of topics, it particularly focuses on areas such as: Preclinical studies of new compounds, especially those that provide mechanistic insights Clinical trials and observations Reviews related to new drugs and current management of hematologic malignancies Novel observations related to new mutations, molecular pathways, and tumor genomics Blood Cancer Journal offers a forum for expedited publication of novel observations regarding new mutations or altered pathways.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信