Patient reported outcomes for the CANDOR trial for multiple myeloma

Bookmark and Share
Published: 13 Jun 2020
Views: 690
Rating:
Save
Prof Katja Weisel - University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

Prof Katja Weisel speaks to ecancer online at the EHA virtual conference 2020 about the CANDOR trial patient reported outcomes.

She explains how the patients reported their outcomes through a life-quality evaluation questionnaire, and explains why this feedback is so important.

Prof Weisel emphasises why this especially important in diseases like multiple myeloma because patients can live a long time with treatment, and constant feedback is important for a better quality of life.

 

ecancer's filming has been kindly supported by Amgen through the ecancer Global Foundation. ecancer is editorially independent and there is no influence over content.

Overall in the CANDOR trial we see that the addition of the third drug of the monoclonal antibody does not significantly affect life quality. In contrast we always see that more effective regimens also lead in myeloma to better life quality. So it underlines the high tolerability and the limited toxicity of monoclonal antibody treatment in multiple myeloma.

All patients participating in the CANDOR trial had a life quality evaluation by the standard questionnaires at defined time points and we had a very high compliance rate during the trial on those questionnaires. I think that the patient reported outcomes are always crucial and as we don’t treat like our laboratory values, we treat the patients and the whole patient in his individual life, so we can develop very effective treatments, however if they are not tolerated or if they are not feasible then we don’t achieve the effect we want to have. This accounts in particular to diseases like multiple myeloma which are per se not curable but patients can live for years with controlled disease but have to stay most of the time under treatment. In particular, there it’s very important to have the continuous feedback and standardised feedback of the patients to move on in innovation and making the outcome of the patient not only better regarding naked progression free and overall survival data but also regarding life quality and maintaining a high life quality during the disease course.