Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31780415›Full record

SynthesisClinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia2020

Minimal Residual Disease Status as a Surrogate Endpoint for Progression-free Survival in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Studies: A Meta-analysis.

Hervé Avet-Loiseau, Heinz Ludwig, Ola Landgren, Bruno Paiva, Chris Morris, Hui Yang, Kefei Zhou, Sunhee Ro, Maria-Victoria Mateos

Abstract readMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical lymphoma, myeloma & leukemia, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 61 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
61citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

61 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Modeling MRD Changes in Myeloma to Understand Treatment Effects, Predict Outcomes, and Investigate Curative Potential.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Observational
  19. Review
  20. Article

1 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

9 authors.

Hervé Avet-LoiseauUnité de Génomique du Myélome, University of Toulouse, Toulouse, France. Electronic address: avet-loiseau.h@chu-toulouse.fr.
Heinz LudwigWilhelminen Cancer Research Institute, Wilhelminenspital, Vienna, Austria.
Ola LandgrenMyeloma Service, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY.
Bruno PaivaClinica Universidad de Navarra, Centro de Investigacion Medica Aplicada (CIMA), Instituto de Investigacion Sanitaria de Navarra (IDISNA), CIBER-ONC number CB16/12/00369, Pamplona, Spain.
Chris MorrisGlobal Biostatistical Science, Amgen, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Hui YangGlobal Biostatistical Science, Amgen, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Kefei ZhouGlobal Biostatistical Science, Amgen, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Sunhee RoGlobal Biostatistical Science, Amgen, Inc, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Maria-Victoria MateosDepartment of Hematology, University Hospital of Salamanca/IBSAL, Salamanca, Spain.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Hongbiao Carl Lekaye · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
Targeting Genomic Instability and Evolution in MyelomaP01CA155258 · NCI · DANA-FARBER CANCER INST · PI Jill Corre · 2011 to 2026
$32.5M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA155258NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic advances have greatly extended survival times in patients with multiple myeloma, necessitating increasingly lengthy trials when using survival outcomes as primary endpoints. A surrogate endpoint that can more rapidly predict survival could accelerate drug development. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate minimal residual disease (MRD) status as a valid progression-free survival (PFS) surrogate in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe searched abstracts in PubMed, The American Society of Hematology, and the European Hematology Association for "myeloma," "minimal residual disease," and "clinical trial." Because of the need to evaluate the treatment effect on MRD response, only randomized studies for subjects with NDMM were included. Details on the MRD-tested populations were required. The meta-analysis was performed by principles outlined at the 2013 United States Food and Drug Administration workshop on MRD in acute myeloid leukemia.

resultsSix randomized studies, representing 3283 patients and 2208 MRD samples, met analysis inclusion criteria. MRD negativity rates ranged from 0.06 to 0.70. The treatment effect on the odds ratio for MRD-negative response strongly correlated with the hazard ratio for PFS with a coefficient of determination for the weighted regression line of 0.97. Our meta-analysis suggested that MRD status met both the Prentice criteria for PFS surrogacy.

conclusionsThese results support the claim that MRD status can be used as a surrogate for PFS in NDMM.

Indexed as

HumansMultiple MyelomaNeoplasm, ResidualProgression-Free SurvivalInduction therapiesMRD negativityPFS surrogacyPlasma cell dyscrasiaPrentice criteria

Identifiers

PMID31780415
PMCPMC7444731

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.