- Center on Health Equity & Access
- Clinical
- Health Care Cost
- Health Care Delivery
- Insurance
- Policy
- Technology
- Value-Based Care
Expert Perspectives on Balancing QOL, Convenience, and Depth of Treatment Response
Panelists discuss how quality of life (QOL) and treatment convenience should be balanced with maximal depth of response through personalized therapy approaches, emphasizing the importance of multidisciplinary care teams and the flexibility to adapt treatment regimens based on individual patient preferences and circumstances.
EP: 1.Treatment Approaches and Goals: Transplant-Eligible vs. Transplant-Ineligible Patients
EP: 2.The Role of ASCT in Frontline Myeloma: Comparative Risks and Benefits with Other Standard Treatment Approaches
EP: 3.Evaluating First-Line Treatment Options: Quadruplet vs Triplet Regimens and NCCN Guidelines
EP: 4.The Role of MRD Status in Post-ASCT Treatment Decisions and Clinical Integration
EP: 5.Tailoring Maintenance Therapy by Patient Risk: Lenalidomide Alone vs Combination Approaches
EP: 6.Balancing Timing of ASCT: Insights on Delayed Transplantation and Long-Term Treatment Outcomes
EP: 7.Managing Early Relapse in Transplant-Eligible MM and the Influence of Clonal Evolution
EP: 8.Advancing Frontline Therapy in Transplant-Eligible Myeloma and Emerging Trends in Smoldering Myeloma Management
EP: 9.Evolving Treatment Strategies in Transplant-Ineligible NDMM: Expert Insights From CEPHEUS, IMROZ and BENEFIT
EP: 10.Navigating First-Line Therapy Guidelines and Treatment Considerations in High-Risk Cytogenetics
EP: 11.Balancing Deeper Response and MRD Negativity With Toxicity Risks in Clinical Decision-Making
EP: 12.Therapy Selection and Management Strategies for Transplant-Ineligible Older Patients
EP: 13.Expert Perspectives on Balancing QOL, Convenience, and Depth of Treatment Response
EP: 14.Key Takeaways From CEPHEUS: Subgroup Analysis
Quality of life and treatment convenience are increasingly important factors in multiple myeloma treatment decisions, particularly for transplant-ineligible patients requiring long-term therapy. The balance between maximal treatment intensity and patient preferences requires individualized discussions about treatment goals, frequency of clinic visits, and acceptable adverse effect profiles. Modern treatment options provide flexibility to adapt regimens based on patient priorities while maintaining therapeutic efficacy.
Treatment personalization involves adjusting dosing schedules, such as transitioning from twice-weekly to once-weekly proteasome inhibitor administration and considering subcutaneous formulations to reduce clinic visit frequency. The availability of multiple effective treatment options allows clinicians to tailor therapy to individual patient circumstances, including mobility limitations, transportation challenges, and personal preferences regarding treatment intensity vs convenience.
Multidisciplinary support including cardio-oncology consultation enables treatment of patients previously considered ineligible for intensive therapy due to comorbidities. The discussion highlights successful treatment of patients with significant cardiac dysfunction through specialized supportive care and monitoring. This comprehensive approach expands treatment options for complex patients while maintaining safety and efficacy standards. The emphasis on team-based care demonstrates how specialized resources can optimize outcomes for challenging patient populations.
