42
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Global Burden of Multiple Myeloma : A Systematic Analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016

      research-article
      , MD 1 , , BA 2 , , MD, PhD 3 , , PhD 4 , , MD, PhD 5 , , MD, PhD 6 , 7 , , PhD 2 , , MD 8 , , BS 2 , , PhD 9 ,   , MD, PhD 10 , 11 , , ScD 12 , , MD, PhD 13 , , MD 14 , , DSc 15 , , MSc 16 , , PhD 7 , , MD, PhD 7 , , PhD 17 , , MD, PhD 18 , 19 , , BA 2 , , MS 20 , , PhD 16 , , MSc 16 , , PhD 20 , 21 , 22 , , MD 23 , , DrPH 7 , , MD, PhD 24 , 25 , , MD 1 , , MD, MPH 2 , 26 ,
      JAMA Oncology
      American Medical Association

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Key Points

          Question

          What is the burden of multiple myeloma globally and by country, how has it changed over time, and how widely available are treatments for this disease?

          Findings

          Myeloma incident cases and deaths increased from 1990 to 2016, with middle-income countries contributing the most to this increase. Treatment availability is very limited in countries with low socioeconomic development.

          Meaning

          Marked variation in myeloma incidence and mortality across countries highlights the need to improve access to diagnosis and effective therapy and to expand research on etiological determinants of myeloma.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Multiple myeloma (MM) is a plasma cell neoplasm with substantial morbidity and mortality. A comprehensive description of the global burden of MM is needed to help direct health policy, resource allocation, research, and patient care.

          Objective

          To describe the burden of MM and the availability of effective therapies for 21 world regions and 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2016.

          Design and Setting

          We report incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2016 study. Data sources include vital registration system, cancer registry, drug availability, and survey data for stem cell transplant rates. We analyzed the contribution of aging, population growth, and changes in incidence rates to the overall change in incident cases from 1990 to 2016 globally, by sociodemographic index (SDI) and by region. We collected data on approval of lenalidomide and bortezomib worldwide.

          Main Outcomes and Measures

          Multiple myeloma mortality; incidence; years lived with disabilities; years of life lost; and DALYs by age, sex, country, and year.

          Results

          Worldwide in 2016 there were 138 509 (95% uncertainty interval [UI], 121 000-155 480) incident cases of MM with an age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) of 2.1 per 100 000 persons (95% UI, 1.8-2.3). Incident cases from 1990 to 2016 increased by 126% globally and by 106% to 192% for all SDI quintiles. The 3 world regions with the highest ASIR of MM were Australasia, North America, and Western Europe. Multiple myeloma caused 2.1 million (95% UI, 1.9-2.3 million) DALYs globally in 2016. Stem cell transplantation is routinely available in higher-income countries but is lacking in sub-Saharan Africa and parts of the Middle East. In 2016, lenalidomide and bortezomib had been approved in 73 and 103 countries, respectively.

          Conclusions and Relevance

          Incidence of MM is highly variable among countries but has increased uniformly since 1990, with the largest increase in middle and low-middle SDI countries. Access to effective care is very limited in many countries of low socioeconomic development, particularly in sub-Saharan Africa. Global health policy priorities for MM are to improve diagnostic and treatment capacity in low and middle income countries and to ensure affordability of effective medications for every patient. Research priorities are to elucidate underlying etiological factors explaining the heterogeneity in myeloma incidence.

          Abstract

          This systematic analysis reports incidence, mortality, and disability-adjusted life-year (DALY) estimates from the Global Burden of Disease 2016 study to characterize the burden of multiple myeloma and the availability of effective therapies for 21 world regions and 195 countries and territories from 1990 to 2016.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Lenalidomide Maintenance After Autologous Stem-Cell Transplantation in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis

          Purpose Lenalidomide maintenance therapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation (ASCT) demonstrated prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo or observation in several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). All studies had PFS as the primary end point, and none were powered for overall survival (OS) as a primary end point. Thus, a meta-analysis was conducted to better understand the impact of lenalidomide maintenance in this setting. Patients and Methods The meta-analysis was conducted using primary-source patient-level data and documentation from three RCTs (Cancer and Leukemia Group B 100104, Gruppo Italiano Malattie Ematologiche dell'Adulto RV-MM-PI-209, and Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome 2005-02) that met the following prespecified inclusion criteria: an RCT in patients with NDMM receiving ASCT followed by lenalidomide maintenance versus placebo or observation with patient-level data available and achieved database lock for primary efficacy analysis. Results Overall, 1,208 patients were included in the meta-analysis (605 patients in the lenalidomide maintenance group and 603 in the placebo or observation group). The median PFS was 52.8 months for the lenalidomide group and 23.5 months for the placebo or observation group (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.55). At a median follow-up time of 79.5 months for all surviving patients, the median OS had not been reached for the lenalidomide maintenance group, whereas it was 86.0 months for the placebo or observation group (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63 to 0.90; P = .001). The cumulative incidence rate of a second primary malignancy before disease progression was higher with lenalidomide maintenance versus placebo or observation, whereas the cumulative incidence rates of progression, death, or death as a result of myeloma were all higher with placebo or observation versus lenalidomide maintenance. Conclusion This meta-analysis demonstrates a significant OS benefit and confirms the PFS benefit with lenalidomide maintenance after ASCT in patients with NDMM when compared with placebo or observation.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            One million haemopoietic stem-cell transplants: a retrospective observational study.

            The transplantation of cells, tissues, and organs has been recognised by WHO as an important medical task for its member states; however, information about how to best organise transplantation is scarce. We aimed to document the activity worldwide from the beginning of transplantation and search for region adapted indications and associations between transplant rates and macroeconomics.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Trends in overall survival and costs of multiple myeloma, 2000–2014

              Little real-world evidence is available to describe the recent trends in treatment costs and outcomes for patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Using the Truven Health MarketScan Research Databases linked with social security administration death records, this study found that the percentage of MM patients using novel therapy continuously increased from 8.7% in 2000 to 61.3% in 2014. Compared with MM patients diagnosed in earlier years, those diagnosed after 2010 had higher rates of novel therapy use and better survival outcomes; patients diagnosed in 2012 were 1.25 times more likely to survive 2 years than those diagnosed in 2006. MM patients showed improved survival over the study period, with the 2-year survival gap between MM patients and matched controls decreasing at a rate of 3% per year. Total costs among MM patients have increased in all healthcare services over the years; however, the relative contribution of drug costs has remained fairly stable since 2009 despite new novel therapies coming to market. Findings from this study corroborate clinical data, suggesting a paradigm shift in MM treatment over the past decade that is associated with substantial survival gains. Future studies should focus on the impact on specific novel agents on patients’ outcomes.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                JAMA Oncol
                JAMA Oncol
                JAMA Oncol
                JAMA Oncology
                American Medical Association
                2374-2437
                2374-2445
                16 May 2018
                September 2018
                16 May 2018
                : 4
                : 9
                : 1221-1227
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Division of Medical Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle
                [2 ]Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, University of Washington, Seattle
                [3 ]University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
                [4 ]Aden University, Aden, Yemen
                [5 ]University of São Paolo, São Paolo, Brazil
                [6 ]Accamargo Cancer Center, São Paolo, Brazil
                [7 ]International Prevention Research Institute, Ecully, France
                [8 ]West Virginia Bureau for Public Health, Charleston
                [9 ]Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York
                [10 ]University of Kragujevac, Kragujevac, Serbia
                [11 ]Center for Health Trends and Forecasts, University of Washington, Seattle
                [12 ]Department of Community Medicine, Public Health and Family Medicine, Jordan University of Science and Technology, Irbid, Jordan
                [13 ]University of Haifa, Haifa, Israel
                [14 ]Postgraduate Institute of Medical Education and Research, Candigarh, India
                [15 ]University of Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy
                [16 ]Institute for Global Health Innovations, Duy Tan University, Danang, Vietnam
                [17 ]University Medical Center, Gronigen, the Netherlands
                [18 ]Golestan Research Center of Gastroenterology and Hepatology, Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran
                [19 ]Digestive Diseases Research Institute, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
                [20 ]Haramaya University, Haramaya, Ethiopia
                [21 ]Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland
                [22 ]Hanoi Medical University, Hanoi, Vietnam
                [23 ]Department of Internal Medicine, Federal Teaching Hospital, Abakaliki, Nigeria
                [24 ]Department of Medical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Karolinska Institutet, Solna, Sweden
                [25 ]Department of Research, Cancer Registry of Norway, Institute of Population-Based Cancer Research, Oslo
                [26 ]Division of Hematology, University of Washington, Seattle
                Author notes
                Article Information
                Corresponding Author: Christina Fitzmaurice, MD, MPH, Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, Division of Hematology, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, 2301 Fifth Ave, Ste 600, Seattle, WA 98121 ( cf11@ 123456uw.edu ).
                Accepted for Publication: April 10, 2018.
                Published Online: May 16, 2018. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2128
                Open Access: This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License. © 2018 Cowan AJ et al. JAMA Oncology.
                Author Contributions: Dr Fitzmaurice had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis. Drs Fitzmaurice and Libby contributed to this work equally.
                Study concept and design: Cowan, Khader, Naghavi, Ukwaja, Libby, Fitzmaurice.
                Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: All authors.
                Drafting of the manuscript: Cowan, Harvey, Khader, Shackelford, Libby.
                Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: Cowan, Allen, Barac, BaSaleem, Bensenor, Curado, Foreman, Gupta, Hosgood, Jakovljevic, Khader, Lad, Linn, Mantovani, Minh Nong, Mokdad, Naghavi, Postma, Roshandel, Sisay, Tat Nguyen, Thanh Tran, Tran, Ukwaja, Vollset, Weiderpass, Fitzmaurice.
                Statistical analysis: Allen, BaSaleem, Foreman, Harvey, Khader, Mokdad, Naghavi, Postma, Tat Nguyen, Tran, Ukwaja, Fitzmaurice.
                Obtained funding: Weiderpass.
                Administrative, technical, or material support: Cowan, Barac, Bensenor, Mokdad, Shackelford, Sisay, Ukwaja, Weiderpass.
                Study supervision: Cowan, Curado, Foreman, Minh Nong, Mokdad, Naghavi, Weiderpass, Libby, Fitzmaurice.
                Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Cowan has received research funding from Janssen and Abbvie. No other disclaimers are reported.
                Meeting Presentation: The abstract from this study was presented online in conjunction with the 2018 ASCO Annual Meeting; May 16, 2018; Chicago, Illinois.
                Article
                coi180044
                10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.2128
                6143021
                29800065
                00ca7769-d4bc-4407-9564-1c6ef40f2037
                Copyright 2018 Cowan AJ et al. JAMA Oncology.

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the CC-BY License.

                History
                : 22 February 2018
                : 10 April 2018
                : 10 April 2018
                Categories
                Research
                Research
                Original Investigation
                Online First

                Comments

                Comment on this article