ArticleHemaSphere2022
Dutch Physician's Perspectives on Diagnosis and Treatment of Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia Before and After the Implementation of a National Guideline.
Article in HemaSphere, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Diagnosis and treatment understanding of Waldenström macroglobulinemia in China: a cross-sectional study].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2024Article
- Waldenström macroglobulinemia: 2023 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American journal of hematology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM), a rare low-grade B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL), has a distinct clinical presentation and different treatment-related side effects compared with other NHL. Currently, a wide variety of therapeutic agents are available for the treatment of WM but there is no consensus on optimal treatment in first line and/or at relapse. The aim of this survey was to evaluate the current knowledge and perspectives of hematologists on diagnosis and treatment of WM. Also, we compare these results to a similar survey done before the publication of the first Dutch national guideline, in order to evaluate the impact of the implementation of a national guideline. A link to an online survey was sent out to all registered hematologists and hemato-oncologists in the Netherlands with the request to participate. The survey contained questions regarding the preferred diagnostic and treatment methods in patients with WM as well as treatment goals. We also compared physicians preferred treatment goals to those of patients (as studied in a recent nationwide patient questionnaire). Ninety-five responses (30% response rate) were obtained, out of which 82 (86%) surveys were complete. The respondents most commonly used dexamethasone-rituximab-cyclophosphamide as first-line treatment. For second-line treatment, bendamustine with rituximab and ibrutinib monotherapy were the most frequently applied. Compared with the initial survey, serum IgM M-protein was determined in all cases, MYD88 mutation analysis was currently widely implemented, prevention of an IgM "flare" was uniformly managed by the respondents and use of rituximab-cyclophosphamide-vincristine-prednisone was entirely abandoned. Physicians differed somewhat from patients with regard to most important treatment goals. The approach to diagnostic methods and treatment options in WM was more consistent with international guidelines and was more homogeneous after implementation of the national guideline. These data indicate an increase in knowledge on WM diagnosis and treatment. This may have resulted from implementation of a local guideline or the global rise in awareness and attention for WM.
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.