Skip to main content

Table 1 Patient Characteristics

From: Treatment patterns and effectiveness of patients with multiple myeloma initiating Daratumumab across different lines of therapy: a real-world chart review study

 

All patients

Frontline daratumumab patients

Daratumumab initiated in 2 L

Daratumumab initiated in 3 L+

Re-treated patients1

N = 299

N = 26

N = 66

N = 207

N = 19

Demographic characteristics

Age at daratumumab initiation, mean ± SD [median]

67.7 ± 11.3 [69.0]

68.2 ± 13.9 [72.0]

68.4 ± 10.2 [68.0]

67.4 ± 11.3 [68.0]

67.2 ± 14.7 [66.0]

Time between MM diagnosis and daratumumab initiation (months), mean ± SD [median]

35.4 ± 30.6 [29.6]

2.1 ± 1.9 [1.8]

24.2 ± 24.6 [15.1]

43.2 ± 30.4 [36.7]

53.3 ± 41.3 [45.3]

Sex, n (%)

  Male

164 (54.8)

15 (57.7)

36 (54.5)

113 (54.6)

10 (52.6)

  Female

135 (45.2)

11 (42.3)

30 (45.5)

94 (45.4)

9 (47.4)

Race, n (%)

  White

163 (54.5)

15 (57.7)

41 (62.1)

107 (51.7)

10 (52.6)

  Black or African American

89 (29.8)

4 (15.4)

11 (16.7)

74 (35.7)

7 (36.8)

  Hispanic

6 (2.0)

0 (0.0)

2 (3.0)

4 (1.9)

0 (0.0)

  Asian

4 (1.3)

1 (3.8)

1 (1.5)

2 (1.0)

0 (0.0)

  Mixed

9 (3.0)

2 (7.7)

3 (4.5)

4 (1.9)

1 (5.3)

  Other

1 (0.3)

0 (0.0)

1 (1.5)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

  Unknown

27 (9.0)

4 (15.4)

7 (10.6)

16 (7.7)

1 (5.3)

Primary insurance plan type, n (%)

  Medicare

181 (60.5)

15 (57.7)

37 (56.1)

129 (62.3)

13 (68.4)

  Commercial insurance

46 (15.4)

4 (15.4)

15 (22.7)

27 (13.0)

3 (15.8)

  Medicaid

8 (2.7)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

8 (3.9)

0 (0.0)

  Other

35 (11.7)

1 (3.8)

7 (10.6)

27 (13.0)

1 (5.3)

  Unknown

29 (9.7)

6 (23.1)

7 (10.6)

16 (7.7)

2 (10.5)

Clinical characteristics

MM stage as of MM diagnosis date (R-ISS)2, n (%)

  Stage I

58 (19.4)

8 (30.8)

17 (25.8)

33 (15.9)

1 (5.3)

  Stage II

104 (34.8)

8 (30.8)

26 (39.4)

70 (33.8)

4 (21.1)

  Stage III

58 (19.4)

2 (7.7)

9 (13.6)

47 (22.7)

5 (26.3)

  Unknown

79 (26.4)

8 (30.8)

14 (21.2)

57 (27.5)

9 (47.4)

Cytogenetic profile as of daratumumab initiation3, n (%)

  Standard

108 (36.1)

19 (73.1)

27 (40.9)

62 (30.0)

9 (47.4)

  High

55 (18.4)

4 (15.4)

9 (13.6)

42 (20.3)

2 (10.5)

  Unknown

136 (45.5)

3 (11.5)

30 (45.5)

103 (49.8)

8 (42.1)

Refractory disease prior to daratumumab initiation4, n (%)

  To any line of therapy prior to daratumumab initiation

210 (76.9)

35 (53.0)

175 (84.5)

15 (83.3)

  To an immunomodulatory drug

162 (59.3)

25 (37.9)

137 (66.2)

10 (55.6)

  To a proteasome inhibitor

153 (56.0)

14 (21.2)

139 (67.1)

13 (72.2)

  To a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory drug

111 (40.7)

7 (10.6)

104 (50.2)

8 (44.4)

Year of daratumumab initiation, n (%)

  2015

2 (0.7)

0 (0.0)

0 (0.0)

2 (1.0)

1 (5.3)

  2016

32 (10.7)

0 (0.0)

2 (3.0)

30 (14.5)

4 (21.1)

  2017

55 (18.4)

0 (0.0)

10 (15.2)

45 (21.7)

4 (21.1)

  2018

78 (26.1)

2 (7.7)

20 (30.3)

56 (27.1)

6 (31.6)

  2019

90 (30.1)

15 (57.7)

23 (34.8)

52 (25.1)

4 (21.1)

  2020

42 (14.0)

9 (34.6)

11 (16.7)

22 (10.6)

0 (0.0)

  1. Abbreviations: 2 L: second-line; 3 L: third-line; kg: kilogram; MM: multiple myeloma; R-ISS: Revised International Staging System; SD: standard deviation
  2. Notes
  3. [1] Re-treatment was defined as the resumption of a daratumumab-based treatment regimen following a ≥ 90-day period during which daratumumab was not administered. Patients were excluded if they had a stem cell transplant during the gap between the daratumumab-based treatment regimens or during these regimens
  4. [2] Definition taken from Palumbo A, Avet-Loiseau H, Oliva S, et al. Revised International Staging System for multiple myeloma: A report from International Myeloma Working Group. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33 [14]: 2863–69
  5. [3] Definition taken from Dimopoulos MA, Oriol A, Nahi H, San-Migel J, Bahlis NJ, Usmani S et al. Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma. New England Journal of Medicine. 2016; 375 [7]: 1319–1331; Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, Usmani S, Siegel D, Anderson KC et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood 2016; 127 [16]: 2955–2962
  6. [4] Refractory disease was established at the regimen level. Refractory disease on a proteasome inhibitor or refractory disease on an immunomodulatory drug was established if a patient’s best response to a treatment regimen including one of these agents was stable disease, progressive disease, or relapse, or if the regimen was discontinued due to disease progression. Refractory disease to a proteasome inhibitor and an immunomodulatory drug was established if a patient’s best response to a treatment regimen including one of these types of agents was stable disease, progressive disease, or relapse, or if the regimen was discontinued due to disease progression