Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25277219›Full record

ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2014

What we mean when we talk about MRD in myeloma. A review of current methods. Part 1 of a two-part series.

Scott Ely, Noa Biran, Ajai Chari

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current hematologic malignancy reports, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 28% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Scott ElyDivision of Hematopathology, Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, 525 East 68th Street, Starr Pavilion, 715, New York, NY, 10065, USA, sae2001@med.cornell.edu.
Noa Biran
Ajai Chari
Cornell University · USHackensack University Medical Center · USIcahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) is becoming standard of care for potentially curable cancers, like some leukemias. For diseases not currently curable, like multiple myeloma (MM), the optimal methodology to assess MRD is much less clear, let alone the clinical significance. In this two-part series, we review each of these aspects of MRD in MM. In part 1, we review different methodologies available for MRD assessment, with an emphasis on multiparameter flow cytometry (MFC) and duplex immunohistochemistry. There is currently a strong push in the MM community for the use of MFC, based on studies demonstrating MRD negativity by MFC being associated with delayed time to relapse. After participating in a recent international meeting of leaders in the field, convened to discuss this topic, we review and assess the voiced opinions and published data. While great strides have been made toward the standardization of MFC for MRD, we review not only intrinsic biologic differences between MM and leukemia but also the technical challenges that follow from these differences, including the need for live cells, a difficult to characterize immunophenotype, and significant interlaboratory variability in MFC testing and interpretation.

Indexed as

Disease ManagementHumansMultiple MyelomaNeoplasm, Residual

Identifiers

PMID25277219
OpenAlexW2028614585

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.