An update in treatment options for multiple myeloma in nontransplant eligible patients
Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy , Volume 16 - Issue 13 p. 1945- 1957
Introduction: Despite the fact that multiple myeloma (MM) is still an incurable disease, the outcome of patients who are eligible and ineligible for high-dose therapy has dramatically improved with the introduction of novel agents, that is proteasome inhibitors (PIs) and immunomodulatory agents (IMiDs). However, this improvement is often not seen in elderly patients (above 75 years).Areas covered: This review will focus on the impact of known prognostic factors in elderly MM patients, and risk factors to identify frail elderly patients. Furthermore, data on known and novel PIs and IMiDs, as well as data on other promising novel treatment strategies, chosen based on current practice and anticipated timely approval, will be discussed. Novel treatment strategies include the use of monoclonal antibodies, such as elotuzumab, daratumumab, SAR650984 and more targeted therapies, such as histone deacetylase inhibitors, kinesin spindle protein inhibitors, and selective inhibitors of nuclear export.Expert opinion: Besides efficacy of treatment, toxicity and quality of life play an important role in treatment choice. Treatment and treatment dosing for the frail elderly as well as risk factors to identify the frail elderly require further consideration, as these patients frequently do not benefit from these novel agents due to early discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity.
|daratumumab, elotuzumab, frailty, HDAC inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, kinesin spindle protein inhibitors, multiple myeloma, novel agents, prognostic markers, proteasome inhibitors, selective inhibitors of nuclear export elderly|
|Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy|
|Organisation||Erasmus MC: University Medical Center Rotterdam|
Broijl, A, & Sonneveld, P. (2015). An update in treatment options for multiple myeloma in nontransplant eligible patients. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy (Vol. 16, pp. 1945–1957). doi:10.1517/14656566.2015.1075507