ArticleBone marrow transplantation2021
Real-world utilisation of ASCT in multiple myeloma (MM): a report from the Australian and New Zealand myeloma and related diseases registry (MRDR).
Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Analysis of pharmacotherapeutic approaches for multiple myeloma and correlated renal and pulmonary impairments: a retrospective real-world registry study in the Greater Gulf Region (REPAIR Study).Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
- Macrofocal multiple myeloma in the era of novel agents in China.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2025Article
- Induction Chemotherapy-Related Covert Cardiac Remodeling in Pre-Autologous Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Multiple Myeloma: A Retrospective Observational Study.Cancer medicine · 2024Observational
- Feasibility and Outcome of First-Line Autotransplant-Based Treatment in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients Aged > 65 Years: Monocentric Retrospective Real-World Analysis.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Update on the outcome of M-protein screening program of multiple myeloma in China: A 7-year cohort study.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Article
- The obesity paradox in multiple myeloma: A report from Multiple Myeloma Research Foundation (MMRF) dataset.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Real-world multiple myeloma front-line treatment and outcomes by transplant in the United States.EJHaem · 2023Article
- The evolving diagnosis and treatment paradigms of multiple myeloma in China: 15 years' experience of 1256 patients in a national medical center.Cancer medicine · 2023Article
- Current treatment paradigm and survival outcomes among patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in China: a retrospective multicenter study.Cancer biology & medicine · 2023Article
- Socioeconomic Disparities in Multiple Myeloma Survival in New South Wales Australia: A Population-Based Cohort Study.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 11 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Supported by clinical trial proven survival benefit, clinical guidelines recommend upfront autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) for eligible MM patients. However, reported real-world utilisation is lower than expected (40-60%). We reviewed ASCT utilisation, demographics and outcomes for MM patients (≤70 years, ≥12-month follow-up) enroled onto the Australian/New Zealand MRDR from June 2012 to May 2020. In 982 patients (<65 years: 684, 65-70 years: 298), ASCT utilisation was 76% overall (<65 years: 83%, 65-70 years: 61%, front-line therapy: 67%). Non-ASCT recipients were older (median age: 65 years vs 60 years, p < 0.001), had more comorbidities (cardiac disease: 16.9% vs 5.4%, p < 0.001; diabetes: 19.1% vs 7.0%, p < 0.001; renal dysfunction: median eGFR(ml/min): 68 vs 80, p < 0.001), inferior performance status (ECOG ≥ 2: 26% vs 13%, p < 0.001) and higher-risk MM (ISS-3: 37% vs 26%, p = 0.009, R-ISS-3 18.6% vs 11.8%, p = 0.051) than ASCT recipients. ASCT survival benefit (median progression-free survival (PFS): 45.3 months vs 35.2 months, p < 0.001; overall survival (OS): NR vs 64.0 months, p < 0.001) was maintained irrespective of age (<65 years: median PFS: 45.3 months vs 37.7 months, p = 0.04, OS: NR vs 68.2 months, p = 0.002; 65-70 years: median PFS: 46.7 months vs 29.2 months, p < 0.001, OS: 76.9 months vs 55.6 months, p = 0.005). This large, real-world cohort reaffirms ASCT survival benefit, including in 'older' patients necessitating well-designed studies evaluating ASCT in 'older' MM to inform evidence-based patient selection.
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.