ArticleBlood cancer journal2023
Multiple myeloma with t(11;14): impact of novel agents on outcome.
Article in Blood cancer journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Predictors of posttransplant measurable residual disease negativity and impact on clinical outcomes in multiple myeloma.Blood advances · 2026Article
- Measurable residual disease assessment in apheresis product from multiple myeloma patients: Correlation with biology, depth of response and survival.British journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Risk of AL Amyloidosis is Associated with Degree of Free Light Chain Elevation and Duration of Exposure.Research square · 2026Article
- Necrobiotic xanthogranuloma: Highlighting the role of clinicopathologic correlation in an atypical presentation.Dermatology online journal · 2026Article
- Clinical significance of t(11;14) translocation in systemic AL amyloidosis in the era of daratumumab therapy.Clinical and experimental medicine · 2025Article
- Molecular and immunological determinants of long-term survival in multiple myeloma.Blood advances · 2025Review
- Successful Salvage Therapy with Pomalidomide, Cyclophosphamide, and Dexamethasone for IgM Myeloma with t (11;14) and Dim CD38 Expression Refractory to Daratumumab, Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone.Internal medicine (Tokyo, Japan) · 2025Article
- Article
- A rare case of multiple myeloma with double translocations: t(11;14) and t(14;16).Journal of hematopathology · 2025Article
- Is t(11;14) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma a favorable outcome in the novel agent era?Blood research · 2025Article
- T(11;14) with multiple myeloma: Standard risk survival but slow and poor response.Annals of hematology · 2024Article
- Exploring the Impact of Cytogenetic Abnormalities on Treatment Responses and Survival Outcomes in Multiple Myeloma: A Single-Centre Experience of 13 Years of Follow-Up.Biomedicines · 2024Article
- Efficacy and safety of generic pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: a multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial.Annals of hematology · 2024Article
- A new prognostic scoring system for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the era of new drugs.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Multiple myeloma (MM) patients with t(11;14) present unique biological features and their prognosis is not well established. We report a retrospective study of 591 MM patients, 17.3% of whom had t(11;14). It was designed to determine the prognostic impact of this abnormality and the effect of novel agents on the response and outcomes. Three groups were established based on their cytogenetics: (1) t(11;14); (2) high-risk chromosomal abnormalities; and (3) standard risk (SR). After 80.1 months (1.2-273.8 months) of follow-up, no differences were observed in overall survival (OS) between the t(11;14) and SR groups (75.8 vs. 87.2 months; P = 0.438). Treatment of MM t(11;14) with novel agents did not improve their overall response rate (ORR) or complete response (CR) compared with those who received conventional therapy (ORR: 87.2 vs. 79.5%, P = 0.336; CR: 23.4 vs. 12.8%, P = 0.215). This effect translated into a similar PFS (39.6 vs. 30.0 months; P = 0.450) and OS (107.6 vs. 75.7 months; P = 0.175). In summary, MM t(11;14) patients did not benefit from the introduction of novel agents as much as SR patients did, indicating that other therapies are needed to improve their outcomes.
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.