ArticleBlood cancer journal2024
Longitudinal assessment of established risk stratification models in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance.
Article in Blood cancer journal, 2024. 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.
- A Comprehensive Review of Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance.Journal of the advanced practitioner in oncology · 2026Article
- A Novel Algorithm for Detecting Monoclonal IgM in Patients with an Elevated Lipemia Index Using the Beckman Coulter AU5800 Analyzer.Annals of laboratory medicine · 2026Article
- Integrative Network Analysis of Single-Cell RNA Findings and a Priori Knowledge Highlights Gene Regulators in Multiple Myeloma Progression.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Current risk stratification and staging of multiple myeloma and related clonal plasma cell disorders.Leukemia · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Risk of progression of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) into multiple myeloma and related plasma cell disorders can be determined by three major risk stratification models, namely Mayo2005, Sweden2014, and NCI2019. This retrospective study of 427 patients with MGUS diagnosed according to the 2014 International Myeloma Working Group criteria aimed to describe and analyze the longitudinal applicability of these risk models. In all three models, the majority of patients remained at their baseline risk group, whereas small numbers of patients migrated to a different risk group. Proportions of patients among risk groups remained stable over time (e.g. Mayo2005 model, low-risk group, at baseline: 43%, after 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 8 years: 40%, 37%, 37%, 43%, 44%, and 43%). All three risk models reliably distinguished risk of progression at baseline, upon yearly reassessment (e.g. 1 year from diagnosis) and in time-dependent analyses. Upstaging to a high-risk category was associated with an increased risk of progression in all three models (Mayo2005: hazard ratio [HR] = 5.43, 95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.21-24.39, p = 0.027; Sweden2014: HR = 13.02, 95% CI 5.25-32.28, p < 0.001; NCI2019: HR = 5.85, 95% CI 2.49-13.74, p < 0.001). Our study shows that MGUS risk stratification models can be applied longitudinally to repeatedly determine and improve individual risk of progression. Patient migration to higher risk categories during follow up should prompt more frequent monitoring in clinical routine.
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.