ArticleAmerican journal of hematology2024
Development and validation of an individualized and weighted Myeloma Prognostic Score System (MPSS) in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.
Article in American journal of hematology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A Multi-Omics and machine learning platelet-related prognostic signature in multiple myeloma.Annals of hematology · 2026Article
- Prediction of ISS and R-ISS Stratification in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Using Lumbar Spine MRI Radiomics Model: A Two-Center Multimodal Study.Journal of imaging informatics in medicine · 2026Article
- Real-world efficacy and safety of the carfilzomib-pomalidomide-dexamethasone regimen in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: A multicenter retrospective study.Therapeutic advances in hematology · 2026Article
- Article
- AI-derived five-gene signature predicts risk in multiple myeloma under bortezomib-based therapy.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- MASS-4 is more suitable than MASS-3 for prognostic stratification in transplant-eligible patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- [Value of gene mutation in the prognosis and treatment of multiple myeloma].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2025Review
- LDHAL6B is a novel prognostic marker and promotes disease progression in multiple myeloma.Haematologica · 2025Article
- Prognostic Implications of Thrombocytopenia in Chinese Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- Development of a Cytogenetic Double-Hit Model for Survival Prediction in Multiple Myeloma.Cancers · 2025Article
- Current State of Evidence on Definitions and Management of High-Risk Multiple Myeloma.Current oncology reports · 2025Review
- Refining High-Risk Multiple Myeloma: Advancements in Genomic, Clinical, and Prognostic Criteria.Mediterranean journal of hematology and infectious diseases · 2025Review
- Progression of disease within 24 months (POD24) in multiple myeloma implicates poor prognosis and limitations of current prediction models for POD24.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- [Chinese expert consensus on diagnosis and treatment of high risk multiple myeloma (2024)].Zhonghua xue ye xue za zhi = Zhonghua xueyexue zazhi · 2024Article
- A new prognostic scoring system for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in the era of new drugs.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
19 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Current standard predictive models of disease risk do not adequately account for the heterogeneity of survival outcomes in patients with new-diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM). In this retrospective, multicohort study, we collected clinical and genetic data from 1792 NDMM patients and identified the prognostic impact of all features. Using the top-ranked predictive features, a weighted Myeloma Prognostic Score System (MPSS) risk model was formulated and validated to predict overall survival (OS). In the training cohort, elevated lactate dehydrogenase level (LDH), International Staging System (ISS) Stage III, thrombocytopenia, and cumulative high-risk cytogenetic aberration (HRA) numbers were found to have independent prognostic significance. Each risk factor was defined as its weighted value respectively according to their hazard ratio for OS (thrombocytopenia 2, elevated LDH 1, ISS III 2, one HRA 1, and ≥2 HRA 2, points). Patients were further stratified into four risk groups: MPSS I (22.5%, 0 points), II (17.6%, 1 points), III (38.6%, 2-3 points), and IV (21.3%, 4-7 points). MPSS risk stratification showed optimal discrimination, as well as calibration, of four risk groups with median OS of 91.0, 69.8, 45.0, and 28.0 months, for patients in MPSS I to IV groups (p < .001), respectively. Importantly, the MPSS model retained its prognostic value in the internal validation cohort and an independent external validation cohort, and exhibited significant risk distribution compared with conventional prognostic models (R-ISS, R2-ISS, and MASS). Utilization of the MPSS model in clinical practice could improve risk estimation in NDMM patients, thus prompting individualized treatment strategies.
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.