ReviewExperimental hematology & oncology2024
Natural killer cell biology and therapy in multiple myeloma: challenges and opportunities.
Review in Experimental hematology & oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Dynamic biomarker-based machine learning model predicts short-term treatment response in multiple myeloma.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- Progressive NK-cell dysfunction and ILC imbalance favor immune evasion in multiple myeloma.Blood advances · 2025Article
- Targeting RNA polymerase I to boost natural killer cell anticancer activity in multiple myeloma.Cell death & disease · 2025Article
- Review
- CAR-NK cell therapy in multiple myeloma: from preclinical and clinical landscape to joining the force for treatment strategies optimization.Cell communication and signaling : CCS · 2025Review
- Tumor-priming CD8Experimental hematology & oncology · 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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite therapeutic advancements, multiple myeloma (MM) remains incurable. NK cells have emerged as a promising option for the treatment of MM. NK cells are heterogenous and typically classified based on the relative expression of their surface markers (e.g., CD56 and CD16a). These cells elicit an antitumor response in the presence of low mutational burden and without neoantigen presentation via germline-encoded activating and inhibitory receptors that identify the markers of transformation present on the MM cells. Higher NK cell activity is associated with improved survival and prognosis, whereas lower activity is associated with advanced clinical stage and disease progression in MM. Moreover, not all NK cell phenotypes contribute equally toward the anti-MM effect; higher proportions of certain NK cell phenotypes result in better outcomes. In MM, the proportion, phenotype, and function of NK cells are drastically varied between different disease stages; this is further influenced by the bone marrow microenvironment, proportion of activating and inhibitory receptors on NK cells, expression of homing receptors, and bone marrow hypoxia. Antimyeloma therapies, such as autologous stem cell transplant, immunomodulation, proteasome inhibition, and checkpoint inhibition, further modulate the NK cell landscape in the patients. Thus, NK cells can naturally work in tandem with anti-MM therapies and be strategically modulated for improved anti-MM effect. This review article describes immunotypic and phenotypic differences in NK cells along with the functional changes in homeostatic and malignant states and provides expert insights on strategies to harness the potential of NK cells for improving outcomes in MM.
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.