Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37206284›Full record

ArticleEJHaem2023

Assessment of current clinical practice throughout the UK for the diagnosis and management of monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance.

Satarupa Choudhuri, Francesco Rainone

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJHaem, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. A Comprehensive Review of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2026
    Article
  2. 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

2 authors.

Satarupa ChoudhuriDepartment of Haematology Northern Care Alliance Manchester UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0874-2303
Francesco RainoneDepartment of Nephrology Northern Care Alliance Manchester UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since the inception of the term monoclonal gammopathy of renal significance (MGRS) in 2012 by the International Kidney and Monoclonal Gammopathy Research Group, there have been no consensus guidelines specifically pertaining to the UK regarding to patient management. We aimed to identify both regional and cross-discipline variation in current clinical practice, to provide insight and rationale for a potential standardised pathway in the future. A national survey of 88 consultants from the disciplines of haematology and nephrology was conducted between June 2020 and July 2021. Agreement was evident for aspects of the diagnostic pathway, including presenting features likely to raise suspicion of MGRS and the most pertinent confounding factors to consider before renal biopsy. However, significant variability was identified in both the cohort of diagnostic tests used, as well as urinary work-up for patients with suspected MGRS. Treatment and monitoring frequency was also an aspect of management identified as variable. Despite differences in clinical practice across the UK, MGRS diagnosis was widely regarded to be the joint responsibility of both disciplines. The results provide an indication of inter-regional and interdisciplinary differences in practice, highlighting the need for improved awareness and standardised protocol for management of MGRS that applies to the UK population.

Indexed as

MGRSmonoclonal gammopathy of renal significance

Identifiers

PMID37206284
PMCPMC10188446

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.