Scholarlink

Background <p>A substantial unmet medical need exists for patients with Multiple Myeloma ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation who relapse after first-line therapy with daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd). Three therapeutic options recommended for lenalidomide-refractory patients from EHA-ESMO guidelines are approved in Europe and reimbursed in Italy: carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd); pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd); selinexor, bortezomib and dexamethasone (SVd). This study aimed to identify key decision criteria and their relevance for assessing these alternatives from a multi-stakeholder perspective.</p> Methods <p>Following ISPOR good practices, we developed a multiple-criteria decision analysis framework using the Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation Technique method. Preferences were elicited from multiple stakeholders, including hematologists, methodologists, decision-makers, and patient representatives. Decision criteria were identified through a targeted literature review, discussed in a multi-stakeholder workshop, and shortlisted with a pragmatic literature review to assess data availability for each alternative.</p> Results <p>The final multiple-criteria decision analysis framework comprised five main criteria: acquisition cost, efficacy, organizational impact, route of administration, and safety. Within the safety criterion, we considered six sub-criteria related to six adverse events: peripheral neuropathy, diarrhoea, nausea, fatigue, anaemia, and thrombocytopenia. Efficacy emerged as the most relevant criterion by most respondents, with a median weight of 38.1%, followed by the safety criterion (26.8% median weight), with peripheral neuropathy being the most relevant safety sub-criterion (34.9%). Based on elicited preferences, SVd was ranked as the most valuable therapy with a global score of 72, followed by PVd (44) and Kd (26), on account of its clinical efficacy. No significant differences in preferences were observed across different stakeholder groups.</p> Conclusions <p>This study provides valuable insights into the post-DRd treatment landscape for Multiple Myeloma, supporting decision-making from an Italian multi-stakeholder perspective.</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

Supporting treatment decision-making for patients with multiple myeloma post-DRd in Italy: a multi-criteria decision framework

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2025年10月31日

查看全文
  • Mario Boccadoro,
  • Angelo Belotti,
  • Felice Bombaci,
  • Sara Bringhen,
  • Gabriele Buda,
  • Anna Maria Cafro,
  • Michele Caimmi,
  • Beatrice Canali,
  • Pier Luigi Canonico,
  • Michele Cavo,
  • Alessandro Corso,
  • Lorenzo De Paoli,
  • Daniele Derudas,
  • Francesco Di Raimondo,
  • Carlotta Galeone,
  • Francesca Gay,
  • Massimo Gentile,
  • Nicola Giuliani,
  • Paola La Malfa,
  • Riccardo Mercati,
  • Vittorio Montefusco,
  • Pellegrino Musto,
  • Massimo Offidani,
  • Francesca Patriarca,
  • Maria Teresa Petrucci,
  • Massimo Riccaboni,
  • Patrizia Tosi,
  • Elena Zamagni,
  • Renato Zambello,
  • Francesca Fiorentino

摘要

Background

A substantial unmet medical need exists for patients with Multiple Myeloma ineligible for autologous stem cell transplantation who relapse after first-line therapy with daratumumab, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd). Three therapeutic options recommended for lenalidomide-refractory patients from EHA-ESMO guidelines are approved in Europe and reimbursed in Italy: carfilzomib and dexamethasone (Kd); pomalidomide, bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd); selinexor, bortezomib and dexamethasone (SVd). This study aimed to identify key decision criteria and their relevance for assessing these alternatives from a multi-stakeholder perspective.

Methods

Following ISPOR good practices, we developed a multiple-criteria decision analysis framework using the Measuring Attractiveness by a Categorical-Based Evaluation Technique method. Preferences were elicited from multiple stakeholders, including hematologists, methodologists, decision-makers, and patient representatives. Decision criteria were identified through a targeted literature review, discussed in a multi-stakeholder workshop, and shortlisted with a pragmatic literature review to assess data availability for each alternative.

Results

The final multiple-criteria decision analysis framework comprised five main criteria: acquisition cost, efficacy, organizational impact, route of administration, and safety. Within the safety criterion, we considered six sub-criteria related to six adverse events: peripheral neuropathy, diarrhoea, nausea, fatigue, anaemia, and thrombocytopenia. Efficacy emerged as the most relevant criterion by most respondents, with a median weight of 38.1%, followed by the safety criterion (26.8% median weight), with peripheral neuropathy being the most relevant safety sub-criterion (34.9%). Based on elicited preferences, SVd was ranked as the most valuable therapy with a global score of 72, followed by PVd (44) and Kd (26), on account of its clinical efficacy. No significant differences in preferences were observed across different stakeholder groups.

Conclusions

This study provides valuable insights into the post-DRd treatment landscape for Multiple Myeloma, supporting decision-making from an Italian multi-stakeholder perspective.