SynthesisCurrent medical science2018
Subcutaneous versus Intravenous Bortezomib Administration for Multiple Myeloma Patients: a Meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Current medical science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Subcutaneous bortezomib might be standard of care for patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Pooled it
- Treatment of transplant-ineligible multiple myeloma.Blood research · 2025Review
- Bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy: from molecular mechanisms to clinical management.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- Article
- Non-Hematologic Toxicity of Bortezomib in Multiple Myeloma: The Neuromuscular and Cardiovascular Adverse Effects.Cancers · 2020Review
- Integrated safety profile of selinexor in multiple myeloma: experience from 437 patients enrolled in clinical trials.Leukemia · 2020Article
- Alpha-lipoic acid alters the antitumor effect of bortezomib in melanoma cells in vitro.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Burden of Treatment-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy in Patients with Multiple Myeloma in Sweden.Acta haematologicaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bortezomib, the first potent therapeutic proteasome inhibitor, has been suggested as a standard care in patients with newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). However, evidence bearing on the efficacy and safety of subcutaneous (SC) versus intravenous (IV) administration of bortezomib for MM patients is controversial. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were enrolled in our meta-analysis to investigate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib via SC vs. IV administration on MM patients. Sixteen trials with a total of2575 patients with MM (SC, n=1191; IV, n=1384) were included in our meta-analysis. There were no significant differences between these two arms regarding overall response rate (ORR), complete response (CR), or very good partial response (VGPR). The pooled RRs for rate of adverse events (AEs), such as thrombocytopenia and bortezomib-induced peripheral neuropathy (BIPN), were 0.79 (95% CI: 0.68-0.92) and 0.63 (95% CI: 0.51-0.79), respectively. Moreover, there was much more largely decreased incidence of grade 3 and higher thrombocytopenia and BIPN in bortezomib SC administration than IV route. In general, alternative SC administration should be considered instead of IV administration in use of bortezomib for patients with MM. Key words: bortezomib; multiple myeloma; meta-analysis; subcutaneous administration.
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.