Scholarlink

Introduction <p>Multiple myeloma (MM) treatment is associated with significant healthcare provider (HCP) and patient time burden due to the frequency and duration of hospital visits for treatment. This study evaluated impacts on HCP and patient time burden of daratumumab subcutaneous (SC)-based versus isatuximab intravenous (IV)-based regimens in patients with newly diagnosed MM who are transplant ineligible.</p> Methods <p>An online survey of HCPs (hemato-oncology specialists, nurse practitioners, and hospital pharmacists) was conducted in nine European countries and Egypt. Respondents provided estimates of HCP and patient time associated with individual SC and IV treatment steps. These survey data and published dosing schedules informed development of a resource utilization model to compare overall time burden for SC and IV regimens over a 2-year cumulative period.</p> Results <p>HCPs reported savings in median active working time per treatment visit for steps before, during and after administration of daratumumab SC versus isatuximab IV treatments, with a total median saving of up to 135&#xa0;min (39.1% reduction). HCPs also reported less median patient time per visit with daratumumab SC versus isatuximab IV treatments, with a total median saving of up to 115&#xa0;min (27.1% reduction). Over 2&#xa0;years, reduced time for SC versus IV administration, coupled with the less frequent dosing schedule for daratumumab versus isatuximab, resulted in marked time savings for HCPs and patients with D-Rd SC (HCPs: 221&#xa0;h saved [64.2% reduction]; patients: 224&#xa0;h [61.2% reduction]), D-VRd SC (HCPs: 157&#xa0;h [45.6% reduction]; patients: 149&#xa0;h [40.7% reduction]), and D-VMP SC (HCPs: 147&#xa0;h [42.7% reduction]; patients: 140&#xa0;h [38.3% reduction]) versus Isa-VRd IV.</p> Conclusions <p>This study demonstrated notable time savings with daratumumab SC-based versus isatuximab IV-based regimens in patients with newly diagnosed MM who are transplant ineligible based on SC versus IV administration and less frequent daratumumab dosing.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Time and Resource Implications of Subcutaneous Daratumumab-Based versus Intravenous Isatuximab-Based Treatment Regimens for Patients with Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Who Are Transplant Ineligible

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年2月19日

查看全文
  • Emma Smith,
  • Alessandro Camera,
  • Alex Bird

摘要

Introduction

Multiple myeloma (MM) treatment is associated with significant healthcare provider (HCP) and patient time burden due to the frequency and duration of hospital visits for treatment. This study evaluated impacts on HCP and patient time burden of daratumumab subcutaneous (SC)-based versus isatuximab intravenous (IV)-based regimens in patients with newly diagnosed MM who are transplant ineligible.

Methods

An online survey of HCPs (hemato-oncology specialists, nurse practitioners, and hospital pharmacists) was conducted in nine European countries and Egypt. Respondents provided estimates of HCP and patient time associated with individual SC and IV treatment steps. These survey data and published dosing schedules informed development of a resource utilization model to compare overall time burden for SC and IV regimens over a 2-year cumulative period.

Results

HCPs reported savings in median active working time per treatment visit for steps before, during and after administration of daratumumab SC versus isatuximab IV treatments, with a total median saving of up to 135 min (39.1% reduction). HCPs also reported less median patient time per visit with daratumumab SC versus isatuximab IV treatments, with a total median saving of up to 115 min (27.1% reduction). Over 2 years, reduced time for SC versus IV administration, coupled with the less frequent dosing schedule for daratumumab versus isatuximab, resulted in marked time savings for HCPs and patients with D-Rd SC (HCPs: 221 h saved [64.2% reduction]; patients: 224 h [61.2% reduction]), D-VRd SC (HCPs: 157 h [45.6% reduction]; patients: 149 h [40.7% reduction]), and D-VMP SC (HCPs: 147 h [42.7% reduction]; patients: 140 h [38.3% reduction]) versus Isa-VRd IV.

Conclusions

This study demonstrated notable time savings with daratumumab SC-based versus isatuximab IV-based regimens in patients with newly diagnosed MM who are transplant ineligible based on SC versus IV administration and less frequent daratumumab dosing.