Balancing the Risk of Cardiotoxicity Outcomes in Treatment Selection for Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Multicenter Evaluation of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRd) Versus Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (KRd)

EJHaem Pub Date : 2025-04-28 DOI:10.1002/jha2.70038
Benjamin J. Lee, Michael Sayer, Ali A. Naqvi, Karen T. Mai, Pranav M. Patel, Lisa X. Lee, Aya F. Ozaki
{"title":"Balancing the Risk of Cardiotoxicity Outcomes in Treatment Selection for Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Multicenter Evaluation of Ixazomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (IRd) Versus Carfilzomib, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone (KRd)","authors":"Benjamin J. Lee,&nbsp;Michael Sayer,&nbsp;Ali A. Naqvi,&nbsp;Karen T. Mai,&nbsp;Pranav M. Patel,&nbsp;Lisa X. Lee,&nbsp;Aya F. Ozaki","doi":"10.1002/jha2.70038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Introduction</h3>\n \n <p>Carfilzomib use has been extensively associated with cardiovascular toxicity; the risk with ixazomib, a novel oral proteasome inhibitor, is underreported and no large comparative analysis is available.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing the TriNetX platform to compare toxicity outcomes among multiple myeloma patients who received lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and ixazomib (IRd) or carfilzomib (KRd).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>After propensity-score-matching 478 patients from each cohort, the onset of new heart failure (HR 0.25; <i>p </i>&lt; 0.001) and arrhythmias (HR 0.57; <i>p</i> = 0.014) at 6 months were significantly lower with IRd while overall survival at 3 years was similar (<i>p</i> = 0.50).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>IRd is associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac toxicities compared to KRd.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":72883,"journal":{"name":"EJHaem","volume":"6 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/jha2.70038","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJHaem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/jha2.70038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction

Carfilzomib use has been extensively associated with cardiovascular toxicity; the risk with ixazomib, a novel oral proteasome inhibitor, is underreported and no large comparative analysis is available.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective cohort study utilizing the TriNetX platform to compare toxicity outcomes among multiple myeloma patients who received lenalidomide, dexamethasone, and ixazomib (IRd) or carfilzomib (KRd).

Results

After propensity-score-matching 478 patients from each cohort, the onset of new heart failure (HR 0.25; < 0.001) and arrhythmias (HR 0.57; p = 0.014) at 6 months were significantly lower with IRd while overall survival at 3 years was similar (p = 0.50).

Conclusion

IRd is associated with a significantly lower risk of cardiac toxicities compared to KRd.

Abstract Image

在多发性骨髓瘤治疗选择中平衡心脏毒性结局的风险:伊沙唑米、来那度胺和地塞米松(IRd)与卡非佐米、来那度胺和地塞米松(KRd)的回顾性多中心评价
卡非佐米的使用与心血管毒性广泛相关;ixazomib(一种新型口服蛋白酶体抑制剂)的风险被低估,也没有大型的比较分析。方法:我们利用TriNetX平台进行了一项回顾性队列研究,比较了来那度胺、地塞米松和伊沙唑米(IRd)或卡非佐米(KRd)治疗的多发性骨髓瘤患者的毒性结局。结果每组478例患者进行倾向评分匹配后,新发心力衰竭发生率(HR 0.25;p & lt;0.001)和心律失常(HR 0.57;p = 0.014) 6个月时的总生存率显著低于IRd,而3年的总生存率相似(p = 0.50)。结论与KRd相比,IRd与心脏毒性风险显著降低相关。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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