Safety and tolerability of a 90-minute rapid infusion of Sandoz biosimilar rituximab in B-cell lymphoproliferative disorders in a real-world setting.

Although rituximab is generally well-tolerated, infusion-related reactions (IRRs) are common with the initial dose when administered intravenously according to standard recommendations. To prevent IRRs, premedication and low-speed infusion rates have been recommended. Consequently, intravenous (i.v.) infusion of rituximab can become a labor-intensive process. Rapid i.v. rituximab infusion over 90 min has demonstrated a favorable safety profile for the second and subsequent infusions during the course of therapy. The aim of this study was to investigate the safety and tolerability of 90-min rapid infusion of Sandoz rituximab biosimilar (SDZ-RTX) for patients with CD20+ lymphoma or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). We retrospectively reviewed all patients with CD20+ lymphoma or CLL who received SDZ-RTX infusions in 90 min from July 2019 to July 2021 at seven Spanish hospitals. The primary end point was the incidence of IRRs. We identified 124 patients and 576 rapid administrations of SDZ-RTX, with an average of five rapid infusions per patient. Most rapid infusions of SDZ-RTX were in combination with CHOP/CHOP-like therapy (48.4%), followed by SDZ-RTX alone (15.1%), in combination with bendamustine (14.5%), or with other regimens (22%). The 90-min SDZ-RTX infusion schedule was well-tolerated with no grade 3/4 IRRs. The incidence of any grade IRR during the first rapid infusion was 1% (5 grade 1 IRRs and 1 grade 2 IRR). In conclusion, rapid 90-min i.v. administration of SDZ-RTX for the second and subsequent infusions during the course of therapy is well-tolerated in patients with CD20+ lymphoma or CLL.

Treatment patterns and outcomes among nontransplant newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients in Spain.

Aim: To describe treatment patterns and outcomes in nontransplant newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients in Spain. Methods: This retrospective study included two cohorts of NDMM patients diagnosed between 1 January 2012 to 31 December 2013 and 1 April 2016 to 31 March 2017. Results: Among 113 patients, proteasome inhibitor (PI) + alkylator combinations (49%) and PI-based regimens without an alkylator (30%) were the most common first-line (1L) therapies. Use of PI + immunomodulatory drug-based regimens increased between the cohorts; PI-based regimens without an alkylator/immunomodulatory drug decreased. Use of 1L oral regimens was low but increased over time; use of maintenance therapy was low across both periods. Median 1L duration of treatment was 6.9 months. Conclusion: Short 1L duration of treatment and low use of 1L oral regimens and maintenance therapy highlight unmet needs in NDMM.

Lay abstract This study describes treatment patterns and outcomes in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients in Spain who were not candidates for transplant. The study looked at two patient groups: patients diagnosed between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2013 and those diagnosed between 1 April 2016 and 31 March 2017. Among the 113 patients considered, the most common first-line therapies were proteasome inhibitor (PI) + alkylator combinations (49%) and PI-based regimens without an alkylator (30%). We saw increased use of PI with immunomodulators (which arm the immune system to battle disease) and decreased use of PI-based regimens without an alkylator or immunomodulator. First-line use of oral regimens was low but increased over time. The median length of first-line treatment for both groups combined was 6.9 months. Finding low use of first-line oral regimens and maintenance therapy and a short duration of first-line treatment, our study highlights the unmet needs that exist in NDMM patients who are not transplant candidates in Spain.