Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28050150›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2016

Risk stratification, treatment selection, and transplant eligibility in multiple myeloma: a qualitative study of the perspectives and self-reported practices of oncologists.

T W LeBlanc, A Howson, W Turell, P Sheldon, S C Locke, S A Tuchman, C Gasparetto, S Kaura, Z M Khan, A P Abernethy

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

T W LeBlancDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, and; Duke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, U.S.A.
A HowsonOpus Science, Annapolis, MD, U.S.A.
W TurellOpus Science, Annapolis, MD, U.S.A.
P SheldonOpus Science, Annapolis, MD, U.S.A.
S C LockeDuke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, U.S.A.
S A TuchmanDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, and.
C GasparettoDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapy, Department of Medicine, and.
S KauraCelgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, U.S.A.
Z M KhanCelgene Corporation, Summit, NJ, U.S.A.
A P AbernethyDuke Cancer Institute, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, U.S.A.
Cellular Therapeutics (United Kingdom) · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSince the early 2000s, treatment options for multiple myeloma have rapidly expanded, adding significant complexity to the management of this disease. To our knowledge, no systematic qualitative research on clinical decision-making in multiple myeloma has been published. We sought to characterize how physicians view and implement guidelines and incorporate novel approaches into patient care.

methodsWe designed a semi-structured qualitative interview guide informed by literature review and an expert advisory panel. We conducted 60-minute interviews with a diverse sample of oncology physicians in the southeast United States. We used a constant comparative method to code and analyze interview transcripts. The research team and advisory panel discussed and validated emergent themes.

resultsParticipants were 13 oncologists representing 5 academic and 4 community practices. Academic physicians reported using formal risk-stratification schemas; community physicians typically did not. Physicians also described differences in eligibility criteria for transplantation; community physicians emphasized distance, social support, and psychosocial capacity in making decisions about transplantation referral; the academic physicians reported using more specific clinical criteria. All physicians reported using a maintenance strategy both for post-transplant and for transplant-ineligible patients; however, determining the timing of maintenance therapy initiation and the response were reported as challenging, as was recognition or definition of relapse, especially in terms of when treatment re-initiation is indicated.

conclusionsPractices reported by both academic and community physicians suggest opportunities for interventions to improve patient care and outcomes through optimal multiple myeloma management and therapy selection. Community physicians in particular might benefit from targeted education interventions about risk stratification, transplant eligibility, and novel therapies.

Indexed as

Multiple myelomaqualitative researchrisk stratificationtreatment decision-making

Identifiers

PMID28050150
PMCPMC5176387
OpenAlexW2565225713

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.