Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31091136›Full record

Trial reportJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology2019

Development and Validation of a Cytogenetic Prognostic Index Predicting Survival in Multiple Myeloma.

Aurore Perrot, Valérie Lauwers-Cances, Elodie Tournay, Cyrille Hulin, Marie-Lorraine Chretien, Bruno Royer, Mamoun Dib, Olivier Decaux, Arnaud Jaccard, Karim Belhadj and 19 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 111 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
111citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
13.4field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

111 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 178 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Co-Occurrence of Cytogenetic Abnormalities and High-Risk Disease in Newly Diagnosed and Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. International Myeloma Society/International Myeloma Working Group Consensus Recommendations on the Definition of High-Risk Multiple Myeloma.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Guideline
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

51 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

29 authors at 20 institutions in 1 country.

Aurore Perrot1 Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire Nancy, Nancy, France.
Valérie Lauwers-Cances2 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Elodie Tournay2 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Toulouse, Toulouse, France.
Cyrille Hulin3 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Bordeaux, Bordeaux, France.
Marie-Lorraine Chretien4 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Dijon, Dijon, France.
Bruno Royer5 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens, Amiens, France.
Mamoun Dib6 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Angers, Angers, France.
Olivier Decaux7 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Rennes, Rennes, France.
Arnaud Jaccard8 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Limoges, Limoges, France.
Karim Belhadj9 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Créteil, Créteil, France.
Sabine Brechignac10 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Bobigny, Bobigny, France.
Jean Fontan11 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Besancon, Besançon, France.
Laurent Voillat12 Centre Hospitalier Chalon sur Saône William Morey, Chalon-sur-Saône, France.
Hélène Demarquette13 Centre Hospitalier de Dunkerque, Dunkirk, France.
Philippe Collet14 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Saint-Étienne, Saint-Étienne, France.
Philippe Rodon15 Centre Hospitalier Périgueux, Périgueux, France.
Claudine Sohn16 Centre Hospitalier Toulon, Toulon, France.
François Lifermann17 Centre Hospitalier Dax, Dax, France.
Frédérique Orsini-Piocelle18 Centre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois, Metz-Tessy, France.
Valentine Richez19 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nice, Nice, France.
Mohamad Mohty20 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Paris, Paris, France.
Margaret Macro21 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Caen Normandie, Caen, France.
Stéphane Minvielle22 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes, France.
Philippe Moreau22 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Nantes, Nantes, France.
Xavier Leleu23 Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Poitiers, Poitiers, France.
Thierry Facon24 Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire Lille, Lille, France.
Michel Attal25 Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole and Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Toulouse, France.
Hervé Avet-Loiseau25 Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole and Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Toulouse, France.
Jill Corre25 Institut Universitaire du Cancer de Toulouse-Oncopole and Centre de Recherches en Cancérologie de Toulouse Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, Toulouse, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nantes · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse · FRCentre Hospitalier Annecy Genevois · FRCentre Hospitalier de Dax –Côte d’Argent · FRCentre Hospitalier de Vitré · FRCentre Hospitalier Intercommunal Toulon-La Seyne-sur-Mer · FRCentre Hospitalier Régional et Universitaire de Nancy · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Amiens-Picardie · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire d'Angers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Besançon · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Bordeaux · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Caen · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Lille · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Limoges · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Nice · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Poitiers · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rennes · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Étienne · FRCentre Hospitalier Universitaire Dijon Bourgogne · FREquipe de Recherche en Epidémiologie Nutritionnelle · FR

Funding

Targeting Genomic Instability and Evolution in MyelomaP01CA155258 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI Jill Corre · 2011 to 2026
$32.5M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA155258
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe wide heterogeneity in multiple myeloma (MM) outcome is driven mainly by cytogenetic abnormalities. The current definition of high-risk profile is restrictive and oversimplified. To adapt MM treatment to risk, we need to better define a cytogenetic risk classification. To address this issue, we simultaneously examined the prognostic impact of del(17p); t(4;14); del(1p32); 1q21 gain; and trisomies 3, 5, and 21 in a cohort of newly diagnosed patients with MM.

methodsData were obtained from 1,635 patients enrolled in four trials implemented by the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome. The oldest collection of data were used for model development and internal validation. For external validation, one of the two independent data sets was used to assess the performance of the model in patients treated with more current regimens. Six cytogenetic abnormalities were identified as clinically relevant, and a prognostic index (PI) that was based on the parameter estimates of the multivariable Cox model was computed for all patients.

resultsIn all data sets, a higher PI was consistently associated with a poor survival outcome. Dependent on the validation cohorts used, hazard ratios for patients in the high-risk category for death were between six and 15 times higher than those of patients in the low-risk category. Among patients with t(4;14) or del(17p), we observed a worse survival in those classified in the high-risk category than in those in the intermediate-risk category. The PI showed good performance for discriminating between patients who died and those who survived (Harrell's concordance index greater than 70%).

conclusionThe cytogenetic PI improves the classification of newly diagnosed patients with MM in the high-risk group compared with current classifications. These findings may facilitate the development of risk-adapted treatment strategies.

Indexed as

PrognosisSurvival AnalysisAgedChromosomes, Human, Pair 21Chromosomes, Human, Pair 3Chromosomes, Human, Pair 5Cytogenetic AnalysisDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGene DeletionHumansMaleMiddle AgedMultiple MyelomaMultivariate AnalysisRisk Assessment

Identifiers

PMID31091136
PMCPMC6804890
OpenAlexW2946678353

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.