ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2021
Current Approach to Managing Patients with Newly Diagnosed High-Risk Multiple Myeloma.
Review in Current hematologic malignancy reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Predicting cytogenetic risk in multiple myeloma using conventional whole-body MRI, spinal dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, and spinal diffusion-weighted imaging.Insights into imaging · 2024Article
- Monitoring multiple myeloma in the peripheral blood based on cell-free DNA and circulating plasma cells.Annals of hematology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewWith rapid advances in the therapeutic landscape and biological insights in multiple myeloma, it is critical to identify and strategically manage high-risk patients to achieve best outcomes with currently available drugs. The purpose of this review is to summarize the management of high-risk myeloma with a focus on recent advances in the field. RECENT
findingsThe most widely accepted definition of "high-risk" is the Revised International Staging System (R-ISS) stage 3 disease, which includes high tumor burden (ISS stage 3) and high-risk FISH cytogenetics or an elevated lactate dehydrogenase level. A major advance in the management of high-risk patients is insight into the importance of achieving and sustaining minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, which is an influential equalizer for long-term outcomes. Quadruplet pre-transplant induction regimens incorporating an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (mAb), proteasome inhibitor (PI: bortezomib or carfilzomib), lenalidomide, and dexamethasone should be strongly considered in high-risk patients given higher odds of getting to MRD negativity with these regimens compared to triplets. In transplant-eligible patients, upfront transplant does lead to a higher rate of sustained MRD negativity and superior PFS compared to delayed transplant. The role of tandem transplant in the context of bortezomib-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (VRD) induction therapy is unclear. Post-transplant maintenance therapy should include lenalidomide in combination with either bortezomib or carfilzomib until progression. For transplant-ineligible patients, VRD or daratumumab-lenalidomide-dexamethasone (DRD) until progressions are both reasonable and choice should be individualized based on patient-related factors. Outcomes of high-risk myeloma patients have improved in the last decade with the use of modern 3-drug induction regimens incorporating a PI and an immunomodulatory drug, with potential for further improvement as we bring anti-CD38 mAb upfront. MRD assessment will play a major role in treatment modification at several key time-points in the future such as pre-transplant, pre-maintenance, and yearly on maintenance therapy.
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.