Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34402201›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2021

Front-line treatment patterns in multiple myeloma: An analysis of U.S.-based electronic health records from 2011 to 2019.

Shaji Kumar, Mellissa Williamson, Uzor Ogbu, Andy Surinach, Stella Arndorfer, Wan-Jen Hong

Open access · goldAbstract readHistorical Article
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

21 citing papers in PubMed, 41 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Observational
  20. Observational
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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Shaji KumarDivision of Hematology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-5392-9284
Mellissa WilliamsonGenentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Uzor OgbuGenentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Andy SurinachGenesis Research, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Stella ArndorferGenesis Research, Hoboken, NJ, USA.
Wan-Jen HongGenentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA.
Mayo Clinic in Arizona · US

Funding

This study was funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche, Ltd.
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Multiple myeloma (MM) treatment options have evolved rapidly, but how new agents are incorporated into treatment decisions in current practice is not well understood. This study examined prescribing trends of physicians treating newly diagnosed MM and treatment outcomes in the United States. Electronic health record data from 6271 adult patients diagnosed with MM and receiving initial treatment between 1 January 2011 and 31 January 2020 were derived from the Flatiron Health electronic-health record de-identified database. The number/types of agents included in therapy regimens, time to next treatment (TTNT), and overall survival (OS) were assessed. Subgroups were analyzed by the International Staging System (ISS) disease stage at diagnosis, stem cell transplant eligibility and timing, and practice type. Exploratory prognostic models evaluated the association between baseline covariates and time-to-event outcomes. The proportion of patients receiving triplet therapies increased from 2011 (36%) to 2019 (72%) as those receiving initial monotherapy or doublet therapy decreased. Overall, the most prevalent triplet regimen consisted of an immunomodulatory drug (IMiD), a proteasome inhibitor, and a steroid. From 2017 to 2019, median TTNT from front-line to second-line was longer in patients with ISS stage I versus stages II/III, and in those receiving IMiD-containing doublet or triplet therapies versus other combinations. Overall median OS was 56 months and increased from 2011 to 2014, after which median OS was not yet reached. Age, ISS stage, and high-risk status were prognostic for both OS and TTNT, while sex, practice type, and ECOG status were prognostic for OS only.

Indexed as

AgedElectronic Health RecordsFemaleHistory, 21st CenturyHumansMaleMultiple MyelomaRetrospective StudiesSurvival AnalysisTreatment OutcomeUnited Statesmultiple myelomaprescribing trendstreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID34402201
PMCPMC8419764
OpenAlexW3193406008

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.