Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 26, 2025

A Method of Trigonometric Modelling of Seasonal Variation Demonstrated with Multiple Sclerosis Relapse Data
Published on: December 9, 2015
Association of adverse events and associated cost with efficacy for approved relapsed and/or refractory multiple
Binod Dhakal1, Ravi K Narra1, Smith Giri2
1Division of Hematology/Oncology, Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, Wisconsin.
Background:
Several new treatment options have been approved for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In this systematic review, associations of the efficacy of each approved regimen with adverse events (AEs) and the total cost per cycle were compared with a Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
Methods:
Scopus, Cochrane, PubMed Publisher, and Web of Science were searched from January 1999 to July 2018 for phase 3 RCTs of regimens (approved by the US Food and Drug Administration) used in RRMM. The relative ranking of agents was assessed with surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities. The primary efficacy, safety, and cost outcomes were progression-free survival with the regimen, grade 3 to 4 AEs, and the total cost per cycle (regimen cost plus average cost of managing AEs).
Results:
Fifteen studies including 7718 patients and evaluating 14 different regimens were identified. Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone were ranked highest for reducing progression (hazard ratio, 0.13; 95% credible interval, 0.09-0.19; SUCRA, 1) but carried the highest probability of total cost per cycle ($41,420; 95% Credible Interval [CrCl], $58,665-$78,041; SUCRA, 0.02). Panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone were the least effective and least safe (SUCRA, 0.24), whereas bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone emerged as least effective with the highest total cost per cycle (SUCRA, 0.33). Carfilzomib and dexamethasone emerged as the winner when this regimen was considered in terms of efficacy and safety (SUCRA, 0.61) and efficacy and total cost per cycle (SUCRA, 0.60).
Conclusions:
The results of this NMA can provide additional guidance for the decision-making process when one is choosing the most appropriate regimen for RRMM.
Insights
New treatments for relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) were compared. Carfilzomib and dexamethasone offered the best balance of efficacy, safety, and cost, guiding treatment decisions.
Area of Science:
- Hematology
- Oncology
- Pharmacoeconomics
Background:
- Relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) has several new treatment options.
- Comparing efficacy, adverse events (AEs), and costs is crucial for optimal patient care.
Purpose of the Study:
- To systematically compare the efficacy, safety, and cost of approved regimens for RRMM.
- To provide guidance for selecting the most appropriate treatment regimen.
Main Methods:
- A Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) of 15 phase 3 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted.
- Efficacy (progression-free survival), safety (grade 3-4 AEs), and total cost per cycle were primary outcomes.
- Surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) probabilities were used to rank agents.
Main Results:
- Daratumumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone showed highest efficacy but highest cost.
- Panobinostat, bortezomib, and dexamethasone were least effective and safe.
- Carfilzomib and dexamethasone demonstrated a favorable balance of efficacy, safety, and cost (SUCRA 0.61 and 0.60).
Conclusions:
- The NMA provides valuable data for clinicians choosing RRMM regimens.
- Carfilzomib and dexamethasone represent a strong option considering multiple factors.
- Informed decision-making can improve outcomes for patients with RRMM.
Related Concept Videos
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Kaplan-Meier Approach
Cancer Survival Analysis
Hazard Ratio
For example, in a clinical trial...
Treatment Resistant Cancers
Comparing the Survival Analysis of Two or More Groups
