PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
September 18, 2025Clinical Hematology International2 citationsOpen Access

Improving Advanced-Line Multiple Myeloma Care: Insights and Real-World Challenges from the EMMY Study

View Full Paper
TCTitouan CazaubielPOPascale OlivierBRBruno Royer

Key Points

  • Overall survival for multiple myeloma patients in Line 4 was reported at 19.4 months, significantly impacted by treatment types.
  • Median time to next treatment was as low as 4.8 months in Line 8, highlighting rapid disease progression in advanced cases.
  • The EMMY study utilized a French cohort of 2127 patients to elucidate real-world treatment challenges and outcomes.
  • Emphasizes the urgent requirement for novel therapies targeted at multiple myeloma, given poor patient outcomes.

Abstract

Managing multiple myeloma (MM) patients receiving advanced (four or more) lines of treatment is a complex challenge. Therefore, real-world data are essential to better understand and address the medical need of this challenging population. We used the EMMY cohort, a French longitudinal real-world study, to describe the characteristics and outcomes of 2127 MM patients receiving advanced-line treatments between 2017 and 2020. A wide variety of treatments were used without a predominant combination showing an evolution over time. Patients exhibited median time to next treatment and overall survival ranging from 7.8 months (95% CI: 6.7-7.8) and 19.4 months (95% CI: 17.4-22.5) in Line 4 (L4) to 4.8 months (95% CI: 3.5-6) and 12.6 months (95% CI: 8.7-16.6) in L8, respectively. The EMMY study provides valuable insights into the real-world application of advanced-line treatments, demonstrating rapid disease progression and poor outcomes in these patients before the novel anti-B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) directed therapies. These findings highlight the critical need for novel therapies in this population.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Cazaubiel et al. (2025) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/68d46ccf31b076d99fa69295https://doi.org/10.46989/001c.143641
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1The EMMY longitudinal, cohort study: real-world data to describe multiple myeloma management and outcomes as more therapeutic options emerge2024 · 7 citations
  2. 2Multiple myeloma: patient outcomes in real‐world practice2016 · 327 citations
  3. 3Analysis of Real-World Data on Overall Survival in Multiple Myeloma Patients With ≥3 Prior Lines of Therapy Including a Proteasome Inhibitor (PI) and an Immunomodulatory Drug (IMiD), or Double Refractory to a PI and an IMiD2016 · 141 citations
  4. 4Natural history of relapsed myeloma, refractory to immunomodulatory drugs and proteasome inhibitors: a multicenter IMWG study2017 · 359 citations
  5. 5Real-World Treatment Patterns, Outcomes, and Healthcare Resource Utilization in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Evidence from a Medical Record Review in France2019 · 14 citations