Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27358777›Full record

ReviewWorld journal of transplantation2016

First line vs delayed transplantation in myeloma: Certainties and controversies.

Annamaria Brioli

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in World journal of transplantation, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
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

1 author at 1 institution in 3 countries.

Annamaria BrioliAnnamaria Brioli, Klinik für Innere Medizin II (Abteilung Hämatologie und internistische Onkologie), Universitätsklinikum Jena, 07740 Jena, Germany.
Policlinico S.Orsola-Malpighi · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the middle of 1990s autologous stem cell transplantation has been the cornerstone for the treatment of young patients with multiple myeloma (MM). In the last decade the introduction of novel agents such as immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and proteasome inhibitors (PI), has dramatically changed the therapeutic scenario of this yet incurable disease. Due to the impressive results achieved with IMiDs and PI both in terms of response rates and in terms of progression free and overall survival, and to the toxicity linked to high dose therapy and autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT), a burning question nowadays is whether all young patients should be offered autotransplantation up front or if this should be reserved for the time of relapse. This article provides a review of the data available regarding ASCT in MM and of the current opinion of the scientific community regarding its optimal timing.

Indexed as

Autologous stem cell transplantationHigh dose therapyImmunomodulatory drugsMultiple myelomaProteasome inhibitors

Identifiers

PMID27358777
PMCPMC4919736
OpenAlexW2473565833

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.