ArticleBlood2025
Comparison of progression risk of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance by method of detection.
Article in Blood, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- The association between allostatic load and monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS).British journal of haematology · 2026Article
- Persistence of M-proteins detected by mass spectrometry.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Male sex adversely impacts survival and myeloid malignancy risk in MGUS: a real-world population-based study.Haematologica · 2026Article
- SECURE study: baseline findings from a UK prospective cohort of incidentally detected MGUS.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Prevalence of monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) using a sensitive mass spectrometry assay in young individuals 10-49 years of age: a population-based study from the National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Hypoalbuminemia in MGUS: interpreting a prognostic signal within its biological context.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Revised criteria for light chain MGUS enhance diagnostic accuracy and risk stratification.Blood cancer journal · 2026Article
- Genomics Define Malignant Transformation in Myeloma Precursor Conditions.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2026Article
- Engineering TCR-directed T-cells for the treatment of multiple myeloma.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Hypoalbuminemia: a new risk factor for progression in patients with monoclonal gammopathy of uncertain significance.Blood cancer journal · 2025Article
- Dysregulated immune proteins in plasma in the UK Biobank predict multiple myeloma 12 years before clinical diagnosis.Blood advances · 2025Article
- Screening for monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance is contraindicated.British journal of haematology · 2025Review
- Is it time to screen for multiple myeloma?Blood · 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
abstractMonoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is an asymptomatic premalignant disorder. The current standard of care is not to screen for MGUS, so it is often incidentally diagnosed in the clinic. It is unknown whether the outcomes of screened vs clinically detected MGUS differ. We compared the progression risk between screened vs clinical MGUS cohorts and assessed whether the MGUS detection method affected risk prediction of established clinical factors (score). We included 379 screened MGUS cases from the Olmsted County population-based study and 1384 patients with MGUS diagnosed during routine clinical evaluation at Mayo Clinic. Median follow-up time for the screened vs clinical cohort was 26.6 and 40.1 years, respectively. Accounting for death as a competing risk, the cumulative incidence of progression at 25 years was similar in the screened (11.1% [95% confidence interval [CI], 8.3-14.8]) vs clinical (10.1% [95% CI, 8.6-11.8]) MGUS cohorts, even when stratified by sex, age, or the baseline MGUS risk score. Overall, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2) of patients with screened MGUS vs 1.0 (95% CI, 0.9-1.2) of those with clinically detected MGUS experienced disease progression for every 100 person-years of follow-up. MGUS detection method did not modify the association between MGUS risk score and progression risk (pinteraction = 0.217) and did not add to known risk factors for progression (likelihood ratio test; P = .839). Here, we show that progression risk among patients with screened vs clinically detected heavy-chain MGUS was similar. Future studies are needed to assess whether tailored follow-up of patients with screened MGUS affects clinical 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.