ReviewHematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program2024
What is the ideal approach-doublet, triplet, or quadruplet(s)?
Review in Hematology. American Society of Hematology. Education Program, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Belantamab mafodotin, bortezomib, and dexamethasone for RRMM in the Japan expansion cohort of the phase 3 DREAMM-7 trial.International journal of hematology · 2026Trial
- Belantamab mafodotin, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone in Japanese patients with RRMM in the phase 3 DREAMM-8 trial.International journal of hematology · 2026Trial
- Continous or fixedcarfilzomib, lenalidomide and dexamethasone (krd) for relapsed-refractory multiple myeloma: long-term follow-up from a multicenter, retrospective real-life surveyfrom European myeloma network (emn) Italy.Annals of hematology · 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
1 author.
Funding
Abstract
Significant progress has been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma (MM), with the introduction of several new drugs with different mechanisms of action. The treatment of newly diagnosed MM has evolved dramatically with the development of highly effective combinations that include 1 or more of the new drugs. Despite the continuing improvement in the overall survival of patients with MM, nearly a quarter of the patients have significantly inferior survival, often driven by a combination of factors, including tumor genetics and host frailty. The focus of initial therapy remains rapid control of the disease with reversal of the symptoms and complications related to the disease with minimal toxicity and a reduction in early mortality. The selection of the specific regimen, to some extent, depends on the ability of the patient to tolerate the treatment and the underlying disease risk. It is typically guided by results of randomized clinical trials demonstrating improvements in progression-free and/or overall survival. While increasing risk calls for escalating the intensity of therapy by using quadruplet combinations that can provide the deepest possible response and the use of autologous stem cell transplant, increasing frailty calls for a reduction in the intensity and selective use of triplet or doublet regimens. The choice of subsequent consolidation treatments and maintenance approaches, including duration of treatment, also depends on these factors, particularly the underlying disease risk. The treatment approaches for newly diagnosed myeloma continue to evolve, with ongoing trials exploring bispecific antibodies as part of initial therapy and CAR T cells for consolidation.
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.