ArticlePloS one2023
Liquid biopsy-based monitoring of residual disease in multiple myeloma by analysis of the rearranged immunoglobulin genes-A feasibility study.
Article in PloS one, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- New Approaches for Measurable Residual Disease Assessment in Multiple Myeloma: Integrating NGS, Mass Spectrometry, and Next-Generation Flow Cytometry to Monitor Treatment Response.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2026Review
- From Germline Susceptibility to Therapeutic Vulnerability: DNA Damage Response Gene Mutations Driving Multiple Myeloma Evolution and Precision Therapy.Human mutation · 2026Review
- Overview of 1q abnormalities in multiple myeloma: scientific opinions from Italian experts.Annals of hematology · 2025Review
- Prognostic Value of PSMB5 and Correlations with LC3II and Reactive Oxygen Species Levels in the Bone Marrow Mononuclear Cells of Bortezomib-Resistant Multiple Myeloma Patients.Current issues in molecular biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The need for sensitive monitoring of minimal/measurable residual disease (MRD) in multiple myeloma emerged as novel therapies led to deeper responses. Moreover, the potential benefits of blood-based analyses, the so-called liquid biopsy is prompting more and more studies to assess its feasibility. Considering these recent demands, we aimed to optimize a highly sensitive molecular system based on the rearranged immunoglobulin (Ig) genes to monitor MRD from peripheral blood. We analyzed a small group of myeloma patients with the high-risk t(4;14) translocation, using next-generation sequencing of Ig genes and droplet digital PCR of patient-specific Ig heavy chain (IgH) sequences. Moreover, well established monitoring methods such as multiparametric flow cytometry and RT-qPCR of the fusion transcript IgH::MMSET (IgH and multiple myeloma SET domain-containing protein) were utilized to evaluate the feasibility of these novel molecular tools. Serum measurements of M-protein and free light chains together with the clinical assessment by the treating physician served as routine clinical data. We found significant correlation between our molecular data and clinical parameters, using Spearman correlations. While the comparisons of the Ig-based methods and the other monitoring methods (flow cytometry, qPCR) were not statistically evaluable, we found common trends in their target detection. Regarding longitudinal disease monitoring, the applied methods yielded complementary information thus increasing the reliability of MRD evaluation. We also detected indications of early relapse before clinical signs, although this implication needs further verification in a larger patient cohort.
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.