Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21991938›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of haematology2012

The Medical Research Council Myeloma IX trial: the impact on treatment paradigms.

Paul G Richardson, Jacob P Laubach, Robert L Schlossman, Irene M Ghobrial, Constantine S Mitsiades, Jacalyn Rosenblatt, Anuj Mahindra, Noopur Raje, Nikhil Munshi, Kenneth C Anderson

Abstract readComparative StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of haematology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Paul G RichardsonDepartment of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA. paul_richardson@dfci.harvard.edu
Jacob P Laubach
Robert L Schlossman
Irene M Ghobrial
Constantine S Mitsiades
Jacalyn Rosenblatt
Anuj Mahindra
Noopur Raje
Nikhil Munshi
Kenneth C Anderson

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteolytic bone disease is a hallmark of symptomatic multiple myeloma. Bisphosphonates have been the mainstay of treatment to preserve skeletal integrity and prevent skeletal-related events in patients with myeloma-related bone disease. Recently, the MRC Myeloma IX trial demonstrated for the first time improved survival and delayed disease progression with the use of an intravenous amino-bisphosphonate, zoledronic acid, vs. an oral agent, clodronate, with intensive and non-intensive anti-myeloma treatment regimens in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. These results validate a large body of preclinical, translational and other clinical data suggesting anti-myeloma effects of amino-bisphosphonates. In addition, this trial also provided the first head-to-head evidence for superiority of one bisphosphonate over another (zoledronic acid vs. clodronate) for reducing skeletal morbidity in patients with multiple myeloma, as well as a prospective comparison of toxicities. Despite the use of non-bortezomib containing anti-myeloma treatment regimens in the MRC Myeloma IX trial, these results are encouraging and provide an impetus to continue to evaluate current treatment guidelines for myeloma-associated bone disease.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBone Density Conservation AgentsClinical Trials as TopicClodronic AcidDiphosphonatesDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleHumansImidazolesInfusions, IntravenousMaleMultiple MyelomaOsteolysisPractice Guidelines as TopicZoledronic AcidBone Density Conservation AgentsClodronic AcidDiphosphonatesImidazolesZoledronic Acid

Identifiers

PMID21991938
PMCPMC3267050

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.