Supplementary materials: Teclistamab versus real-world physician’s choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

dataset

posted on 2024-04-15, 10:49 authored by Amrita Krishnan, Ajay K. Nooka, Ajai Chari, Alfred L. Garfall, Thomas G. Martin, Sandhya Nair, Xiwu Lin, Keqin Qi, Anil Londhe, Lixia Pei, Eric Ammann, Rachel Kobos, Jennifer Smit, Trilok Parekh, Alexander Marshall, Mary Slavcev, Saad Z. Usmani

These are peer-reviewed supplementary materials for the article 'Teclistamab versus real-world physician’s choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma' published in the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research.

Data sources, study designs, and analysis methods

Patients treated with teclistamab in MajesTEC-1
Flatiron Health database
Analysis populations and design

Aim: We compared the effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician’s choice of therapy (RWPC) in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. Materials & methods: MajesTEC-1 eligibility criteria were applied to the RWPC cohort. Baseline covariate imbalances were adjusted using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Overall survival, progression-free survival and time to next treatment were compared. Results: After inverse probability of treatment weighting, baseline characteristics were similar between cohorts (teclistamab, n = 165; RWPC, n = 364 [766 observations]). Teclistamab treated patients had numerically better overall survival (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.82 [95% CI: 0.59–1.14]; p = 0.233) and significantly greater progression-free survival (HR: 0.43 [0.33–0.56]; p < 0.0001) and time to next treatment (HR: 0.36 [0.27–0.49]; p < 0.0001) versus the RWPC cohort. Conclusion: Teclistamab offered clinical benefit over RWPC in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.