Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28105211›Full record

ArticleOncology letters2016

Diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to multiple myeloma patients: 'Real-world' data from representative multicentre treatment surveys in Germany between 2008 and 2011.

Thomas M Moehler, Maximilian Merz, Lenka Kellermann, Hartmut Goldschmidt, Wolfgang Knauf

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Oncology letters, 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
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 21% 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, 10 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas M MoehlerDepartment of Medicine V, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg 69120, Germany.
Maximilian MerzDepartment of Medicine V, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg 69120, Germany.
Lenka KellermannOncology Information Service, Freiburg 79098, Germany.
Hartmut GoldschmidtDepartment of Medicine V, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg 69120, Germany; National Center for Tumor Diseases, Heidelberg 69120, Germany.
Wolfgang KnaufOnkologische Gemeinschaftspraxis, Frankfurt 60389, Germany.
Heidelberg University · DEPraxis für Hämatologie und Onkologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A survey was conducted to investigate the standard of care for multiple myeloma in Germany, in order to clarify the status of implementation of international and national treatment guidelines. In addition, the changes in disease management over time were investigated by comparison with surveys conducted in 2008 and 2009. The survey captured a representative sample of 478 myeloma patients with a mean age of 67.9 years across various stages of the disease. Diagnostic approaches, prognostic aspects and treatment decisions were evaluated based on a survey conducted in 2011 in 58 representative centres in Germany, including university and non-university hospitals and office-based haematologists. Data were collected from chart reviews and were analysed retrospectively. Over time, an increasing number of patients were investigated for cytogenetic abnormalities (53%). Age <69 years and lack of comorbid conditions were major determinants for cytogenetic testing. Bortezomib/chemotherapy-based regimens have become the preferred first-line treatments independent of planning autologous blood stem cell transplantation (ASCT) in first-line therapy. Thalidomide- and lenalidomide-based combination therapies are typically used as second-line treatments in 31% of patients. Compared with previous reviews, the frequency of ASCT was stable, at ~30% of patients. Younger age and indicators of more severe disease, such as the presence of CRAB criteria, influenced the decision in favour of performing ASCT. Compared to previous surveys, the requirement for erythropoietin and granulocyte colony-stimulating factor, as well as transfusions of red blood cells and platelets, respectively, have decreased considerably. In summary, novel agents have led to a substantial change in the first-line and relapsed treatment approaches. Age and comorbidities remain major factors influencing treatment decisions, but cytogenetic testing to investigate myeloma-related risk profiles is increasingly integrated. The use of novel agents has affected supportive care, with reduced necessity for substitute blood products and reduced administration of bone marrow-stimulating factors.

Indexed as

autologous stem cell transplantationmultiple myelomanovel agents

Identifiers

PMID28105211
PMCPMC5228488
OpenAlexW2555837463

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.