Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33950462›Full record

ReviewCurrent hematologic malignancy reports2021

MRD Assessment in Multiple Myeloma: Progress and Challenges.

Luca Bertamini, Mattia D'Agostino, Francesca Gay

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

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 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
6.9field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 68 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Multiple Myeloma Unpacked.Hematological oncology · 2025
    Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. [European journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2024
    Article
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

3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Luca BertaminiMyeloma Unit, Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, via Genova 3, 10126, Torino, Italy.
Mattia D'AgostinoMyeloma Unit, Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, via Genova 3, 10126, Torino, Italy.
Francesca GayMyeloma Unit, Division of Hematology, University of Torino, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino, via Genova 3, 10126, Torino, Italy. fgay@cittadellasalute.to.it.ORCID 0000-0002-8619-412X
Azienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purpose of reviewOver the last decade, the development of effective treatment approaches for multiple myeloma (MM) has been associated with higher response rates and longer survival. In patients who achieve complete response, several high sensitivity techniques have been studied to assess minimal residual disease (MRD) and detect residual neoplastic cells within the bone marrow (by flow cytometry or molecular biology techniques) or outside the bone marrow (by imaging or circulating disease markers in the peripheral blood). This is of utmost importance, since residual disease can drive clinical relapse. This review focuses on the progress made in the assessment of MRD in MM. RECENT

findingsThe achievement of MRD negativity after therapy is considered prognostically important for MM patients, and data from clinical trials and meta-analyses have confirmed that it is strongly associated with better survival. Along with well-known techniques, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), next-generation flow (NGF), and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), other methods such as mass spectrometry (MS) and circulating tumor cells are under study. Intensive treatment regimens at diagnosis can lead up to 70% of MRD negativity in MM patients, although the current proportion of curable patients is still unknown. Today, clinicians who treat MM deal with MRD assessment in routine clinical practice. Its appropriate use in therapeutic decision making may be the most fascinating and challenging issue to be addressed over the next few years.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorBone MarrowCombined Modality TherapyDisease ManagementDisease SusceptibilityFlow CytometryHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMagnetic Resonance ImagingMultiple MyelomaNeoplasm, ResidualPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyPrognosisSpectrometry, Mass, Matrix-Assisted Laser Desorption-IonizationTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, TumorMass spectrometry (MS)Multiple myeloma; minimal residual disease (MRD)Next-generation flow (NGF)Next-generation sequencing (NGS)Positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT)

Identifiers

PMID33950462
OpenAlexW3158305645

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.