Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26089396›Full record

Trial reportBlood2015

Critical analysis of the stringent complete response in multiple myeloma: contribution of sFLC and bone marrow clonality.

Joaquín Martínez-López, Bruno Paiva, Lucía López-Anglada, María-Victoria Mateos, Teresa Cedena, María-Belén Vidríales, María Auxiliadora Sáez-Gómez, Teresa Contreras, Albert Oriol, Inmaculada Rapado and 12 more

Open access · bronzeAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in Blood, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed
7.2field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 62 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. 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

22 authors at 13 institutions in 1 country.

Joaquín Martínez-LópezHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
Bruno PaivaHematology Department, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Centro de Investigación Medica Aplicada, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain;
Lucía López-AngladaHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
María-Victoria MateosHematology Department, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca-Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca, Instituto de Biología Molecular y Celular del Cáncer de Salamanca-Centro de Investigación del Cáncer, Salamanca, Spain;
Teresa CedenaHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
María-Belén VidríalesHematology Department, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca-Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca, Instituto de Biología Molecular y Celular del Cáncer de Salamanca-Centro de Investigación del Cáncer, Salamanca, Spain;
María Auxiliadora Sáez-GómezHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
Teresa ContrerasHematology Department, Hospital Universitario de Salamanca-Instituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca, Instituto de Biología Molecular y Celular del Cáncer de Salamanca-Centro de Investigación del Cáncer, Salamanca, Spain;
Albert OriolHematology Department, Hospital Germans i Trials, Barcelona, Spain;
Inmaculada RapadoHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
Ana-Isabel TeruelHematology Department, Hospital Clínico de Valencia, Valencia, Spain;
Lourdes CordónHematology Department, Hospital La Fe, Valencia, Spain;
María Jesús BlanchardHematology Department, Hospital Ramon y Cajal, Madrid, Spain;
Enrique BengoecheaHematology Department, Hospital de Donostia, San Sebastián, Spain;
Luis PalomeraHematology Department, Hospital Clínico Universitario, Zaragoza, Spain;
Felipe de ArribaHematology Department, Hospital Morales Messeguer, Murcia, Spain;
Cecilia Cueto-FelguerosoHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
Alberto OrfaoHematology Department, Servicio General de Citometría and Departamento de Medicina, Universidad de Salamanca, Salamanca, Spain; and.
Joan BladéHematology Department, Hospital Clinic, Institut d'Investigacions Biomédiques August Pi I Sunyer, Barcelona, Spain.
Jesús F San MiguelHematology Department, Clinica Universidad de Navarra, Centro de Investigación Medica Aplicada, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Navarra, Pamplona, Spain;
Juan José LahuertaHematology Department, Hospital Universitario 12 de Octubre, Madrid, Spain;
Spanish Multiple Myeloma Group / Program for the Study of Malignant Blood Diseases Therapeutics (GEM / PETHEMA) Cooperative Study Group
Hospital Universitario 12 De Octubre · ESNavarre Institute of Health Research · ESBiogipuzkoa Health Research Institute · ESCentro de Investigación del Cáncer · ESConsorci Institut D'Investigacions Biomediques August Pi I Sunyer · ESHospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia · ESHospital Clínico Universitario Lozano Blesa · ESHospital General Universitario Morales Meseguer · ESHospital Universitario Ramón y Cajal · ESInstituto de Biología Molecular y Celular del Cáncer de SalamancaInstituto de Investigación Biomédica de Salamanca · ESLeitat Technological Center · ESUniversidad de Salamanca · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Stringent complete response (sCR) criteria are used in multiple myeloma as a deeper response category compared with CR, but prospective validation is lacking, it is not always clear how evaluation of clonality is performed, and is it not known what the relative clinical influence is of the serum free light chain ratio (sFLCr) and bone marrow (BM) clonality to define more sCR. To clarify this controversy, we focused on 94 patients that reached CR, of which 69 (73%) also fulfilled the sCR criteria. Patients with sCR displayed slightly longer time to progression (median, 62 vs 53 months, respectively; P = .31). On analyzing this contribution to the prognosis of sFLCr or clonality, it was found that the sFLCr does not identify patients in CR at distinct risk; by contrast, low-sensitive multiparametric flow cytometry (MFC) immunophenotyping (2 colors), which is equivalent to immunohistochemistry, identifies a small number of patients (5 cases) with high residual tumor burden and dismal outcome; nevertheless, using traditional 4-color MFC, persistent clonal BM disease was detectable in 36% of patients, who, compared with minimal residual disease-negative cases, had a significantly inferior outcome. These results show that the current definition of sCR should be revised.

Indexed as

Bone MarrowBone Marrow TransplantationDisease-Free SurvivalHumansImmunoglobulin Light ChainsKaplan-Meier EstimateMultiple MyelomaRemission InductionTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeImmunoglobulin Light Chains

Identifiers

PMID26089396
PMCPMC4543912
OpenAlexW2157513488

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.