ArticleHematological oncology2017
Efficacy and safety of high-dose chemotherapy with autologous stem cell transplantation in senior versus younger adults with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.
Article in Hematological oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy and safety of autologous stem cell transplantation in patients aged ≥ 65 years with multiple myeloma in the era of novel agents.Bone marrow transplantation · 2019Article
- The pharmacologic management of multiple myeloma in older adults.Expert opinion on pharmacotherapy · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors.
Funding
Abstract
We retrospectively studied 340 fit patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT). We hypothesized that progression-free survival (PFS) of older patients was non-inferior to that of younger patients after ASCT. Our null hypothesis was that the PFS hazard ratio (HR) for a 5-year increase in age was ≥1.05; the alternative (non-inferiority) hypothesis was that the HR was ≤1. The observed HR was 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86-1.03); since the CI upper bound was <1.05, we reject the null hypothesis and conclude that PFS in older patients was at least as good as in younger patients. We cannot reject an analogous null hypothesis for overall survival (HR 1.06 [95% CI 0.94-1.19]), since the CI upper bound >1.05. Toxicity was similar across ages and transplant-related mortality was minimal. 28% of subjects <65 versus 45% of those ≥65 received maintenance therapy. In summary, ASCT prolongs PFS equally well in older vs. younger adults. Although we cannot exclude maintenance as a confounder, these data support ASCT for fit seniors with MM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.