Editor’s highlights from the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research – June 2023
In this monthly column, I share some of my highlights from the latest issues of the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research, partner journal of The Evidence Base.
I’m pleased to announce the publication of the June issue of the Journal of Comparative Effectiveness Research (Volume 12, Issue 6). This month’s issue includes a short communication article looking at treatment for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, along with research articles on the assessment of ovarian cancer risk and safety outcomes of treatments for dry eye disease.
Teclistamab versus real-world physician’s choice of therapy in triple-class exposed relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma
Multiple myeloma is an incurable disease that has been increasing in incidence over the past 15 years. Overall survival rates have improved in this time due to improvements in treatment, which involves sequential lines of therapy, generally with the three most-used drug classes – immunomodulatory drugs, proteasome inhibitors and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibodies. However, once a patient has been exposed to all three classes, treatment options are limited and there is an unmet need for new treatments for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Teclistamab has been approved for the treatment of triple-class exposed RRMM, and in this study Krishnan et al. (City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center, CA, USA) performed an indirect treatment comparison to assess the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus real-world physician’s choice of therapy.
A real-world comparison of the clinical and economic utility of OVA1 and CA125 in assessing ovarian tumor malignancy risk
There are currently no US FDA-approved tests for the detection and diagnosis of ovarian cancer. Although serum cancer antigen 125 (CA125) is a commonly used biomarker for clinicians to assess ovarian masses for malignancy, it is only FDA-approved for monitoring recurrence of ovarian cancer after treatment. While useful at more progressive disease stages, the CA125 test has not been shown to be effective in identifying earlier disease. An estimated 5 to 10% of women develop an adnexal mass during their lifetime, with surgical intervention a common treatment option. However, only 10% of the 200,000 patients in the USA who undergo surgery for an adnexal mass annually are found to have ovarian cancer. The OVA1® test was approved by the FDA for clinical use in 2009, and evaluates five protein biomarkers (apolipoprotein A1, beta 2 microglobulin, CA125, prealbumin and transferrin) to determine ovarian cancer risk (indicating low, high or intermediate risk). In this, the largest study of its kind, Reilly et al. (Axia Women’s Health, OH, USA) evaluated the OVA1 and CA125 risk-assessment tests and their impact on the patient’s course of treatment and related resource consumption.
Safety, adherence and discontinuation in varenicline solution nasal spray clinical trials for dry eye disease
Varenicline solution nasal spray (VNS) is US FDA-approved for the treatment of signs and symptoms of dry eye disease, a chronic condition of the ocular surface affecting an estimated 38 million people in the USA. In this study, authors Hauswirth et al. (University of Colorado, CO, USA) conducted a retrospective integrated safety analysis of the ONSET-1, ONSET-2 and MYSTIC trial data to review safety outcomes for VNS, contrasting those with discontinuation outcomes from topical cyclosporine and lifitegrast clinical trials.
You can read the full June issue here, where all the articles are freely available to read. As ever, get in touch if you have any queries about the journal or are interested in contributing to a future issue.