Patient preferences for interferon alfa in multiple myeloma

Differences between physician and patient preferences for cancer treatments: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is useful to facilitate cancer treatment decisions. However, it is difficult to make treatment decisions when physician and patient preferences are different. This review aimed to summarize and compare the preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted on PubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus. Studies elicited and compared preferences for cancer treatments between physicians and patients were included. Information about the study design and preference measuring attributes or questions were extracted. The available relative rank of every attribute in discrete choice experiment (DCE) studies and answers to preference measuring questions in non-DCE studies were summarized followed by a narrative synthesis to reflect the preference differences.

RESULTS

Of 12,959 studies identified, 8290 were included in the title and abstract screening and 48 were included in the full text screening. Included 37 studies measured the preferences from six treatment-related aspects: health benefit, adverse effects, treatment process, cost, impact on quality of life, and provider qualification. The trade-off between health benefit and adverse effects was the main focus of the included studies. DCE studies showed patients gave a higher rank on health benefit and treatment process, while physicians gave a higher rank on adverse effects. Non-DCE studies suggested that patients were willing to take a higher risk of adverse effects or lower health benefit than physicians when accepting a treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Physicians and patients had important preference differences for cancer treatment. More sufficient communication is needed in cancer treatment decision-making.

Fixed duration vs continuous therapy in multiple myeloma

The introduction of new drugs with less severe toxicity profiles than those of conventional antimyeloma agents allowed the evaluation of continuous therapy compared with fixed duration therapy. In transplant-eligible patients, consolidation therapy with bortezomib or bortezomib-based regimens showed significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in cytogenetic standard-risk patients and to a lesser extent, high-risk patients. Continuous therapy with lenalidomide maintenance treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation resulted in a significant survival gain. In transplant noneligible patients, continuous lenalidomide-dexamethasone therapy improved survival over fixed duration melphalan-prednisone-thalidomide. The concept of prolonged treatment in elderly patients is supported by some other studies, but most of them revealed a gain in PFS only. Young patients with unfavorable prognosis show a greater willingness to accept long-term treatment, whereas the readiness to undergo such treatments and the benefits therefrom decline with increasing age and decreasing fitness, rendering fixed duration therapy a suitable option in elderly frail patients.

Treatment trade-offs in myeloma: A survey of consecutive patients about contemporary maintenance strategies

BACKGROUND

Two randomized trials have demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) with lenalidomide maintenance after autologous transplantation for multiple myeloma (MM). Overall survival (OS) results are conflicting, and quality-of-life (QOL) data are lacking. The authors conducted a systematic survey of patients with MM regarding what constitutes a meaningful benefit that would make burdens of maintenance treatments (toxicity and cost) acceptable.

METHODS

A self-administered survey was mailed to 1159 consecutive, living patients who were evaluated at Mayo Clinic. The survey provided background information on the standard of care for MM and data on maintenance. Patients were asked to estimate the magnitude of OS benefit that would be acceptable for various degrees of toxicity and cost.

RESULTS

Of 1159 surveys sent, 886 patients (83.2%) responded, and 736 patients returned a completed survey (66% raw response rate). The most worrisome potential toxicity was identified as peripheral neuropathy by 27% of patients, cytopenias by 24%, deep vein thrombosis by 20%, fatigue by 15%, nausea by 8%, and diarrhea/constipation by 7%. If treatment was free, had no toxicity, and the OS benefit was ≤1 year, then 49% of patients indicated that they would choose maintenance; with moderate toxicity, this proportion decreased to 42%. Adding a treatment cost of $25 per month decreased the proportion that would choose maintenance to 39% of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The current results indicated that willingness to receive maintenance treatment declined when actual benefits were provided in concrete numeric terms compared with a general statement of PFS benefit. The authors also observed that the magnitude of benefit required to consider maintenance was affected by cost and toxicity.

Misconceptions, challenges, uncertainty, and progress in guideline recommendations

Although the quality of clinical practice guidelines has improved over the last decade, current guideline systems have limitations that reduce their validity and limit their acceptance. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group, a worldwide collaboration of guideline developers, methodologists, and clinicians, has constructed a system for developing guidelines that addresses these shortcomings. The system includes a transparent and rigorous methodology for rating the quality of evidence, an explicit balancing of benefits and harms of healthcare interventions, an explicit acknowledgement of the values and preferences that underlie the recommendations, and whether the intervention represents a wise use of resources. These four elements determine whether a recommendation is strong or weak. A guideline panel offers strong recommendations when virtually all informed patients would choose the same management strategy. Weak recommendations imply that choices will differ across the range of patient values and preferences. The GRADE system has been tested in multiple practice settings and for a large spectrum of questions, refined and re-evaluated to ensure that it captures the complex issues involved in evidence assessment and grading recommendations while maintaining simplicity and practicality. Many guideline organizations and medical societies have endorsed the system and adopted it for their guideline processes.

Quality-of-life tradeoffs for hepatitis C treatment: do patients and providers agree?

BACKGROUND

The authors investigated differences between how patients and providers evaluate the quality-of-life tradeoffs associated with HCV treatment in computer-assisted interviews. They interviewed 92 treatment-naive HCV patients at gastroenterology, methadone maintenance, and HIV clinics at 3 hospitals in New York City and 23 physicians or nurses experienced in treating HCV at other hospitals in New York City. Subjects completed rating scale and standard gamble evaluations of current health and hypothetical descriptions of HCV symptoms and treatment side effects on a scale from 0 (death or worse than death) to 1 (best possible health).

RESULTS

. Treatment side effects were rated worse by patients than providers using the rating scale (moderate side effects 0.42 v. 0.62; severe side effects 0.24 v. 0.40) and standard gamble (moderate side effects 0.61 v. 0.91; severe side effects 0.52 v. 0.75) (all P < or = 0.01). A year of severe side effects was equivalent to 4.1 years of mild HCV symptoms avoided for patients if they returned to their current health after treatment compared with 2.0 years avoided if they achieved average population health. For patients with depression symptoms, HCV treatment with severe side effects had lower value unless it would also improve their current health.

CONCLUSIONS

. Patients have more concerns about treatment side effects than providers. Further research is warranted to develop HCV decision aids that elicit patient preferences and to evaluate how improved communication of the risks and benefits of HCV treatment and more effective treatment of depression may alter these preferences.

An open, randomized, controlled, phase II, single centre, two-period cross-over study to compare the quality of life and toxicity experienced on PEG interferon with interferon-α2b in patients with multiple myeloma maintained on a steady dose of interferon-α2b

PURPOSE

To compare the effects of pegylated interferon-alpha2b (P-IFN) and interferon-alpha2b (IFN) on quality of life (QoL) and toxicity in patients with multiple myeloma maintained on a steady dose of IFN.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Consenting, eligible myeloma patients on IFN maintenance therapy for at least 6 weeks were randomly (1:1) allocated to receive P-IFN for 3 months followed by IFN for 3 months, or to continue with IFN for 3 months followed by P-IFN for 3 months (cross-over design). Patients were assessed for toxicity and QoL. Dose of P-IFN was equivalent to IFN.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 60 patients. At enrollment, 35 patients were in complete remission, 20 in partial remission and 5 were minimal responders. P-IFN was associated with significantly better global QoL score (mean difference 8.4; P = 0.0002). There was a significant improvement in functional scales--physical (P = 0.03), emotional (P = 0.04), social (P = 0.0008) with P-IFN. Fatigue (P = 0.0003), pain (P = 0.02) and appetite loss (P = 0.003) symptom scales were less in patients while on P-IFN. There were no statistically significant differences between treatment arms in QoL as measured by QLQ-MY24.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that patients on P-IFN have a better QoL. Dose escalation studies are warranted to investigate potential impact on survival.

Probabilistic threshold technique showed that patients' preferences for specific trade-offs between pain relief and each side effect of treatment in osteoarthritis varied

OBJECTIVES

Therapeutic decisions in osteoarthritis (OA) often involve trade-offs between accepting risks of side effects and gaining pain relief. Our objectives were (1) to determine patients' maximum acceptable risk increments (MARI) for different adverse effects from OA medication and (2) to identify the predictors of these preferences.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

MARI were measured with a probabilistic threshold technique (TT). Risk and pain levels in the TT scenarios were controlled for in a 2x2 randomized factorial design. Clinical, sociodemographic, and psychological characteristics (decisional conflict and locus of control) of the participants were assessed using a self-administered questionnaire.

RESULTS

For 196 subjects, MARI varied by type of adverse effect, level of pain relief, and baseline risk. Mean MARI ranged from 3% to 5% for heart attack/stroke, 5% to 8% for stomach bleed, 13% to 21% for hypertension, 22% to 33% for fluid retention, and 23% to 35% for dyspepsia. Age, gender, education, physical and mental health, pain, disability, and locus of control were not associated with MARI.

CONCLUSION

Participants varied widely in the level of risk they would accept, but their clinical, sociodemographic, and psychological characteristics did not explain this variation. These observations are important for the development of practice guidelines for physicians and patients' decision aids that can foster individualized, evidence-based yet preference-sensitive care for patients with OA.

New Approaches to Treatment for Multiple Myeloma: Durable Remission and Quality of Life as Primary Goals

New treatment approaches are changing the traditional paradigm for myeloma management. Partial or complete response with first-line therapy is now highly attainable. The focus of attention has thus shifted to obtaining the most durable remissions with the highest quality of life. A critical open question is whether more arduous and toxic therapies are justified with the intent to seek a cure. Patients with minimal symptoms at diagnosis are particularly reluctant to pursue aggressive strategies without documented long-term benefit. Conversely, patients with poor-risk molecular features, such as 13q deletion or t(4;14) translocation, can hopefully benefit from novel targeted therapies. New combinations incorporating bortezomib, thalidomide, and/or lenalidomide plus other novel agents offer the opportunity to explore therapy that is more effective and less toxic than in the past. The efficacy of single and tandem transplantation, which have documented long-term survival benefit, need to be compared with regimens integrating novel therapies. Whether true complete remission is a prerequisite for substantially improved survival is a central question in the framework of planned trials. The ultimate goal is to achieve clinical response (complete or partial) that offers the best quality remission for the longest period. Ideally, more effective induction and/or consolidation treatments will avoid concomitant toxicities and the need for maintenance therapies. Fortunately, new agents already offer longer-term disease control. The ongoing search for a cure will undoubtedly demand courage and dedication on the part of investigators and patients.

What survival benefits do premenopausal patients with early breast cancer need to make endocrine therapy worthwhile?

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant endocrine therapies such as tamoxifen, goserelin, and oophorectomy improve survival for premenopausal women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. However, these treatments often result in menopausal symptoms, sexual dysfunction, permanent infertility, or the need to delay pregnancy. We aimed to quantify the survival gains that premenopausal patients with early-stage breast cancer require to justify the side-effects and inconvenience of adjuvant endocrine treatments.

METHODS

Participants consisted of 102 women who had been diagnosed with early-stage (stage I-II) breast cancer 6-60 months previously, who were aged 40 years or younger at diagnosis, and who had been treated for a minimum of 3 months with endocrine therapy (67 with tamoxifen alone, seven with goserelin alone, and 28 with tamoxifen and goserelin or oophorectomy). 76 patients also received chemotherapy, and 75 received radiotherapy. Participants attended a face-to-face patient-preference interview, in which they were presented with four hypothetical clinical scenarios that were used to quantify the gains in survival rate and life expectancy that women judged necessary to make their endocrine therapy worthwhile. They also completed a questionnaire on standard psychological measures.

FINDINGS

About half of participants thought that adjuvant endocrine therapy was worthwhile for an absolute gain in survival of 2% from a baseline of either 65% or 85%, and for a gain in life expectancy of 3 months from a baseline of 5 years and of 6 months for a baseline of 15 years. Women who had had more severe endocrine side-effects required larger gains to make endocrine therapy worthwhile (univariate p=0.02, multivariate p=0.04).

INTERPRETATION

Modest gains in survival are sufficient to make adjuvant endocrine treatment worthwhile for premenopausal women with early-stage breast cancer. Knowing and incorporating what women think should enhance shared decision-making.

[Interferons and hematology]

BACKGROUND

IFN alpha are cytokines used for a number of years in the treatment of certain hemopathies, i.e. of a myeloid and lymphoid etiology. IFN alpha are a family of polypeptides produced by eukaryote cells in response to various stimulant agents. The first trials using this cytokine in humans were carried out by H. Strander in the years 1965-1970. IFN alpha contain anti-viral, anti-proliferative and immunomodulatory properties. The access of clinicians to IFN alpha molecules, in addition to elements produced by genetic engineering for approximately the past 20 years, has permitted a number of therapeutic trials to be carried out. In hematology the clinical interest of IFN alpha was primarily in chronic myeloid and lymphoid proliferating syndromes. Certain indications have to date been well demonstrated. However, the impact of IFN alpha on therapeutic care of certain hemopathies as compared to conventional treatment remains controversial. At the same time, the frequency of side effects from treatment with IFN alpha and its cost should be taken into consideration.

CURRENT POSITION AND MAJOR POINTS

The therapeutic trials carried out over the past ten years have proven the interest of IFN alpha in, essentially, two diseases: on one hand chronic myeloid leukemia with the acquisition of cytogenetic remission and on the other malignant non-Hodgkin's follicular type lymphoma. However, as regards other hemopathies the place of IFN alpha remains debatable.

PERSPECTIVES

The future of IFN alpha use in the treatment of hemopathies appears to be linked to its association with new treatments, an association, however, where its efficacy and superiority should be demonstrated. This is the case in chronic myeloid leukemia where IFN alpha could be associated with aracytine or the inhibitors of tyrosine kinase. Also, in the treatment of malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphomas as well as the studies concerning the association between IFN alpha and monoclonal antibodies, in particular antibody anti-CD 20.

Patient preferences for treatment of lupus nephritis

OBJECTIVE

To examine the amount of improvement in renal survival that lupus patients require before choosing cyclophosphamide over azathioprine for the treatment of lupus nephritis.

METHODS

Patients were presented with descriptions of cyclophosphamide and azathioprine and asked to indicate their preferred choice if each conferred an equal probability of renal survival. Strength of preference was assessed by systematically increasing the probability of renal survival of the more toxic treatment until the respondent's choice switched.

RESULTS

Ninety-three well-educated women (mean age +/- SD 40 +/- 7 years) participated in the study. Ninety-eight percent (91/93) of the participants chose azathioprine over cyclophosphamide when both drugs conferred an equal probability of renal survival. Although most subjects switched preferences to cyclophosphamide for better renal survival, 31% (28/91) were unwilling to switch from azathioprine to cyclophosphamide for improved short-term renal survival, and 15% (14/91) were unwilling to switch from azathioprine to cyclophosphamide for improved long-term renal survival.

CONCLUSION

Although the majority of patients switched preferences to cyclophosphamide for better renal survival, a substantial minority was unwilling to accept the toxicity associated with cyclophosphamide, even if it was much better than azathioprine at preventing renal failure.

Unwillingness of rheumatoid arthritis patients to risk adverse effects

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate patient willingness to accept the risk of adverse effects (AEs) commonly associated with arthritis medications.

METHODS

Rheumatoid arthritis patients were asked to rate their willingness to take a medication associated with 17 specific AEs using a visual analogue scale.

RESULTS

We interviewed 100 patients. Eighty-one were currently using one or more disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (DMARDs) and 29 had previously experienced AEs related to DMARDs. Seventy-five stated that they were doing very well or well with respect to their arthritis compared with other people their age. Thirty-five per cent of those interviewed were unwilling to accept the risk of cosmetic changes, 38% were unwilling to accept the risk of temporary discomfort and 45% were unwilling to accept the risk of major toxicity. Patients who had previously experienced AEs were more willing to accept the risk of cosmetic changes (83 vs. 58%, P=0.02), temporary discomfort (79 vs. 55%, P=0.02) and major toxicity (83 vs. 44%, P=0.001) compared with those who had not previously experienced AEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Many rheumatoid arthritis patients are very concerned about potential drug toxicity. However, risk adversity appeared to be attenuated by past experience with AEs. Our results suggest that certain patients, especially those with milder disease activity, might be reluctant to accept commonly used arthritis medications if they are fully informed of their potential toxicity.

Interferon as therapy for multiple myeloma: an individual patient data overview of 24 randomized trials and 4012 patients

Many randomized trials have evaluated alpha-interferon as myeloma therapy, some suggesting a benefit and others not. Most were too small to give reliable answers, so a systematic overview has been performed to provide a more reliable estimate of the effect of interferon. The main end-points were response rates (induction trials), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Individual patient data were supplied for 24 trials involving 4012 patients, 12 induction trials (2469 patients) and 12 maintenance trials (1543 patients). In induction, response rates were slightly better with interferon (57.5% versus 53.1%, P = 0.01). PFS was better with interferon (33% versus 24% at 3 years, P < 0.00001), an effect seen in both induction (P = 0.0003) and maintenance (P < 0.00001) trials. Median time to progression was increased by about 6 months in both settings. OS was somewhat better with interferon (53% versus 49% at 3 years, P = 0.01) with median survival increased by about 4 months. This benefit was restricted to the smaller trials. The effect of interferon was not significantly related to the dose or duration of interferon or to patients' characteristics. PFS was improved with interferon, but the survival benefit, if any, was small and needs balancing against cost and toxicity.

Alpha-interferon maintenance treatment is associated with improved survival after high-dose treatment and autologous stem cell transplantation in patients with multiple myeloma: a retrospective registry study from the European Group for Blood and Marrow Transplantation (EBMT)

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of alpha-IFN maintenance treatment after autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for multiple myeloma in a retrospective registry analysis. 473 patients with multiple myeloma who received IFN maintenance treatment ASCT were compared with 419 patients who did not receive IFN-treatment. Patients who were evaluable for response and in complete or partial remission at 6 months after ASCT were eligible, after excluding patients with graft failure. Cox proportional hazards assumptions were checked and handled by stratification. The prognostic variables unevenly distributed between the two groups were statistically corrected for in the Cox analysis. 391 patients reached complete remission (CR) after ASCT (203 in the IFN group and 188 in the no-IFN group) and 501 were in partial remission (PR, IFN 270, no-IFN 231). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were significantly better in the IFN-group (OS, 78 vs 47 months, P = 0.007, and PFS, 29 vs 20 months, P = 0.006, respectively). The difference in OS and PFS was most strongly pronounced in the PR patients. 209 patients have died (IFN, 84; no-IFN, 125). Progressive myeloma was the cause of death in 94% of the IFN-treated patients and in 83% of the no-IFN group (P = NS). Thus, IFN maintenance treatment after ASCT was associated with better OS and PFS. Treatment seemed to be most beneficial in patients who did not achieve CR. The difference in median survival was as long as 2.5 years, and although part of this difference is attributable to differences in other prognostic factors, it might justify possible differences in quality-of-life due to adverse effects of interferon treatment.

Interferon in multiple myeloma--summary of treatment results and clinical implications

Even though interferon (IFN) has been used in myeloma treatment for more than two decades, its efficacy is still controversial. Meta-analysis of randomized trials is based either on individual patient data or on published data. We performed meta-analyses on published and reported data using, in addition to the standard method, three independent methods of evaluating Kaplan-Meier curves. Thirty randomized trials on IFN induction or maintenance treatment were meta-analyzed. Combined IFN-chemotherapy induction treatment resulted in significant increases of repsonse rates (6.6%), as well as median relapse-free (4.8 months) and overall survival (3.1 months). IFN maintenance treatment prolonged median relapse-free survival by 4.4 months, median overall survival by 7.9 months. Drug costs of IFN per 1-year survival gain were US$ 42,236.19 for induction therapy and US$ 18,114.95 for maintenance treatment. To conclude, our results a are in accordance with those obtained from individual patient data by the Myeloma Trialists' Collaborative Group. Because of the consistent, though limited, improved trial outcomes, IFN treatment should be suggested to all myeloma patients who might benefit from it.

Patient preference for cancer therapy: an overview of measurement approaches

PURPOSE

In the era of evidence-based medicine and shared decision making, the formal assessment of patient preference for treatments or treatment outcomes has attracted much attention. In this article, the two most common approaches to the evaluation of preference, ie, utility assessment and probability trade-off assessment, are described. The purpose is to provide clinicians with the background knowledge needed to interpret preference studies published in the literature and to judge whether the reported findings are relevant to their own patients.

METHODS

An overview is given of the methods used to assess utilities and probability trade-off scores. Evidence on determinants of such scores is presented. Examples from oncology are provided. Because experience with the treatment plays an important role as a determinant of preferences for both treatments and treatment outcomes, special attention is paid to the interpretation of studies in the light of subject selection. Directions for future research are suggested.

CONCLUSION

The choice of approach and the measuring instrument depend on the goal of the preference assessment. Normal psychologic processes, such as coping, adaptation, and cognitive dissonance reduction, cause patients who are about to undergo a therapy or have experienced a therapy to rate it more favorably than other patients do. This should be remembered when using evidence from the literature to inform patients or for patient decision making.

Interferon-alpha treatment in multiple myeloma: meta-analysis of 30 randomised trials among 3948 patients

BACKGROUND

After two decades of interferon (IFN) treatment in myeloma patients and many randomised clinical trials, no definite proof of its benefits exists. This meta-analysis of all available relevant published data tests the differences between IFN and control arms in a large patient population and addresses the issue of cost-effectiveness.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Meta-analysis was performed on 17 trials among 2333 patients who received IFN-chemotherapy induction treatment or chemotherapy alone and on 13 trials among 1615 patients on IFN maintenance therapy or without treatment. Response rates and parameters of published Kaplan Meier relapse-free and overall survival curves were analysed.

RESULTS

Patients in IFN arms showed significantly better results in all investigated parameters: IFN-chemotherapy induction treatment yielded 6.6% higher response rates (2P < 0.002) as well as 4.8-month and 3.1-month prolongations of relapse-free (P < 0.01) and overall survival (P < 0.01), respectively. Interferon maintenance therapy lead to 4.4-month (P < 0.01) and 7.0-month (P < 0.01) prolongations of relapse-free and overall survival, respectively. Meta-analysis of all IFN trials combined resulted in 4.6-month and 3.7-month IFN-related gains in relapse-free and overall survival, respectively. As early as 6 and 12 months after the start of IFN treatment, percentages of cumulative relapse-free and overall survival were always significantly higher in IFN trial arms. IFN drug expenses for a one-year survival gain, as determined from AUCs of best-fitted Gompertz functions of IFN and control survival curves, were estimated to be US$42,482.28 for induction therapy and US$18,968.16 for maintenance treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly superior outcomes were consistently found in IFN trial arms by meta-analysis of published data. These results are in accordance with a concomittantly conducted meta-analysis on individual patient data but were much easier to accrue. Taking all our results into account. i.e., the consistently significant, although limited, improvement of clinical outcomes and its acceptable cost-effectiveness, IFN treatment of patients with multiple myeloma seems worthwhile to be considered.

Progress in haematopoietic stem cell transplantation for multiple myeloma

High-dose myeloablative treatment followed by autologous haematopoietic stem cell transplantation has significantly improved survival of patients younger than 65 years of age with multiple myeloma as compared with conventional chemotherapy. However, all patients seem to relapse and molecular remissions are rare. Results of allogeneic transplantation, still hampered by high transplant-related mortality, have improved dramatically over the last 5-6 years and this is an option for patients younger than 50-55 years old. The relapse rate is lower than with autologous transplantation and molecular remissions are frequent. Some patients are still in complete haematological remission more the 10 years following transplantation. Autologous transplantation followed by nonmyeloablative allogeneic transplantation is on trial and may be a way to eventually cure a fraction of younger patients with multiple myeloma.

Viewpoint on the impact of interferon in the treatment of multiple myeloma: benefit for a small proportion of patients?

Interferon-alpha (IFN-alpha) generally inhibits myeloma cell growth. However, a growth stimulatory effect for myeloma cells has also been reported. In patients with untreated multiple myeloma (MM) IFN-alpha, used as a single agent, produced an objective response rate ranging from 10 to 25%. In previously untreated patients: (1) the time to response is short, (2) the median duration of response is similar to the duration of response observed in patients given chemotherapy, and (3) the patients who are more likely to benefit are those with IgA myeloma type. Concerning the results of IFN-alpha given as a single agent in relapsing and resistant MM, they are poor, with a response rate ranging between 10-20%. The combination of high-dose glucocorticoids and IFN-alpha for relapsing/resistant patients produced controversial results. Some studies showed an increased response rate and/or longer survival with chemotherapy plus IFN-alpha versus chemotherapy alone in previously untreated patients. In contrast, most reports did not show a significant increase in response rate or survival benefit by adding IFN-alpha to the initial chemotherapy. Perhaps the most encouraging role for IFN in MM is as maintenance therapy in patients responding to first line treatment (ie conventional chemotherapy followed or not by high-dose intensification/autotransplantation). In spite of that, several reports failed to show longer response duration. The majority of studies have shown a modest but significant prolongation in response duration in favour of the IFN arm. However, most of these studies have failed to show a significant survival advantage with IFN maintenance. A meta-analysis, by the Myeloma Trialists' Collaborative Group in Oxford, based on the individual data from 4012 patients included in 24 randomized trials (induction and/or maintenance) has shown that IFN produced a moderate improvement in relapse-free survival and a minor improvement in overall survival. In summary, the only role of IFN in MM is as maintenance treatment after a response is achieved. However, looking at the published data, it seems that the vast majority of patients do not benefit from IFN maintenance, while a small proportion of them, in the range of 5-10%, obtain a significant prolongation in event-free survival and overall survival. Unfortunately, there are no predictive factors that can identify the patients who are likely to benefit from IFN maintenance.

Therapeutic options in the treatment of multiple myeloma: pharmacoeconomic and quality-of-life considerations

A review of current treatment options in multiple myeloma is presented, including data on health-related quality of life and pharmacoeconomics. For induction chemotherapy, no combination of cytostatic drugs has been shown to be consistently superior to the simple cyclic oral treatment with melphalan and prednisone that has been available for 30 years. The total resource consumption and direct costs per patient treated with melphalan and prednisone is approximately $US10,000 (1995 values). As median survival is prolonged from less than a year in untreated patients to 30 to 36 months, this treatment must be considered cost effective. Interferon-alpha has a modest effect on progression-free and overall survival when added to chemotherapy regimens. However, the high cost and toxicity of this drug results in an unfavourable cost-utility ratio, estimated to be between $US50,000 to $US100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Clinical trials suggest that high dose chemotherapy followed by autologous stem cell support administered to patients who have achieved disease stabilisation or objective response to conventional induction chemotherapy, prolongs median survival by about 1.5 years. Preliminary cost-utility analyses suggest a cost per life-year gained of $US30,000 to $US40,000. Further potential improvements of this therapeutic modality are under way. Several bisphosphonates have been tested for the ability to prevent the skeletal complications of multiple myeloma. Monthly infusions of pamidronate have been shown in 1 randomised trial to significantly reduce the rate of skeletal complications. Unfortunately, the rapid and widespread acceptance of this therapy seems to preclude further prospective, placebo-controlled trials with cost-utility evaluation.

Interferon in the Treatment of Multiple Myeloma

BACKGROUND: The role of interferon (IFN) in the treatment of multiple myeloma has been investigated for nearly two decades. The mechanisms underlying antitumor activity of IFN may be mediated by antiproliferative and immunomodulatory effects. The benefits of treatment remain controversial, and guidelines for the use of IFN in myeloma are needed. This review evaluates available data on the impact of IFN therapy on multiple myeloma. METHODS: A MEDLINE search of published prospective, randomized trials of IFN in multiple myeloma provided the data included in this review, as well as selected abstracts presented at international meetings. RESULTS: IFN has complex and pleiotropic effects on human myeloma lines and ex vivo myeloma cells. An antiproliferative effect with disruption of the IL-6-mediated growth loop may be crucial, but biologic heterogeneity in myeloma may have important clinical implications for response to IFN. IFN has demonstrable antitumor activity in multiple myeloma but appears to have a modest effect on overall survival when combined with chemotherapy during induction or when used as maintenance therapy. Most studies have shown a prolongation of the plateau phase of disease with IFN of variable duration of between four and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: A reliable estimate of the benefit of IFN in the overall population of patients with myeloma is difficult to determine with discordant results from different trials. Possible sources of heterogeneity in randomized trials need to be identified, and recognition of subsets of patients who may benefit is important. Cost-benefit analyses with integration of quality-of-life data are essential for developing guidelines for the use of IFN in myeloma.

MRC trial of alpha2b-interferon maintenance therapy in first plateau phase of multiple myeloma. MRC Working Party on Leukaemia in Adults

Plateau phase has been achieved in 64% of all newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma treated with the ABCM (adriamycin, BiCNU, cyclophosphamide and melphalan) regimen in the Medical Research Council (MRC) trials; this stable clinical stage of the disease is associated with no more than minimal symptoms. Several studies have found that alpha-interferon (alpha-IFN) maintenance therapy increases the duration of plateau phase, but it is less clear if this translates into prolonged survival. We report the effect of alpha-IFN on the duration of plateau phase and overall survival in a trial with 284 patients who were randomized to receive alpha2b-IFN (Intron-A) or no maintenance therapy during first plateau phase. The minimum follow-up after randomization was 21 months. There was no significant difference in the overall survival between the two treatment groups (X2=0.32, P=0.57). There was a trend towards longer relapse-free survival in the patients allocated alpha-IFN, but this trend to longer plateau phase was not statistically significant (X2 = 1.62, P = 0.2). Disease progression at relapse on alpha-IFN appears to be more severe with greater elevations from plateau levels of serum paraprotein (P = 0.06) and beta2-microglobulin (P= 0.03) levels. Physicians tended to start chemotherapy sooner after diagnosis of relapse when patients had received alpha-IFN (P = 0.16). Although, in common with most other studies, there is a trend for patients treated with alpha-IFN to have a longer plateau phase, this is counteracted by morbidity attributable to the treatment and a somewhat shortened survival post relapse. Meta-analysis of interferon trials is required to assess whether the minor trend for longer survival in patients maintained on alpha-IFN found in some studies is significant and, if so, the extent of this advantage.