ArticleCancer management and research2017
Induction regimens for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Efficacy of Interventions for Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: An Umbrella Review.Journal of clinical & experimental oncology · 2025Article
- Construction of a prognosis‑associated long noncoding RNA‑mRNA network for multiple myeloma based on microarray and bioinformatics analysis.Molecular medicine reports · 2020Article
- Long-Term Efficacy of Maintenance Therapy for Multiple Myeloma: A Quantitative Synthesis of 22 Randomized Controlled Trials.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2018Article
- Enhanced recovery programs in lung cancer surgery: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Cancer management and research · 2017Article
- New proteasome inhibitors in the treatment of multiple myeloma.Hematology, transfusion and cell therapyReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the early efficacy and survivals of induction regimens for transplant-eligible patients with untreated multiple myeloma. MATERIALS AND
methodsA comprehensive literature search in electronic databases was conducted for relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Eligible studies were selected according to the predefined selection criteria, before they were evaluated for methodological quality. Basic characteristics and data for network meta-analysis (NMA) were extracted from included trials and pooled in our meta-analysis. The end points were the overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
resultsA total of 14 RCTs that included 4,763 patients were analyzed. The post-induction ORR was higher with bortezomib plus thalidomide plus dexamethasone (VTD) regimens, and VTD was better than the majority of other regimens. For OS, VTD plus cyclophosphamide (VTDC) regimens showed potential superiority over other regimens, but the difference was not statistically significant. The PFS was longer with thalidomide plus doxorubicin plus dexamethasone (TAD) regimens for transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM).
conclusionThe NMA demonstrated that the VTD, VTDC, and TAD regimens are most beneficial in terms of ORR, OS, and PFS for transplant-eligible patients with NDMM, respectively.
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.