SynthesisAnnals of hematology2024
Patient-reported outcome domains in multiple myeloma randomized controlled trials and association with survival outcomes.
Synthesis in Annals of hematology, 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.
- Clinical characteristics, laboratory measures, and quality of life as predictors of medication adherence in multiple myeloma.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Improved survival in patients admitted to ICU with multiple myeloma: a retrospective cohort analysis.Annals of intensive care · 2026Article
- Recent Updates and Advancements in the Diagnosis and Management of Plasma Cell Dyscrasias.Cureus · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) are crucial endpoints in multiple myeloma (MM) randomized controlled trials (RCTs), yet there is significant variability in their methodology and reporting. Our study aimed to (a) identify the most commonly pre-specified PRO domains in MM RCTs and those most responsive to modern therapies, and (b) examine the association between PROs and progression-free survival (PFS)/overall survival (OS). We performed a systematic review of MM RCTs that used EORTC QLQ-C30 and published between 01/2014-06/2023. The association between PFS/OS and PRO was explored using Fisher's exact test or Pearson's Chi-squared test. Thirty-five RCTs were identified, with PROs as secondary or exploratory endpoints in all studies. About one-third of RCTs (n=11, 31.4%) pre-specified at least one EORTC QLQ-C30 domain, with the most common domains being Global health status/Quality of life (GHS/QoL) (n = 10, 90.9%), Physical Functioning (n = 6, 54.5%), Fatigue (n = 6, 54.5%), and Pain (n = 6, 54.5%). A statistically significant and/or clinically meaningful difference in at least one EORTC QLQ-C30 domain between arms was seen in 23/35 trials (65.7%), with the most common domains showing improvement being GHS/QoL (12/23 trials), Pain (11/23 trials), Fatigue (9/23 trials), and Physical Functioning (9/23 trials). PRO was noted to be concordant with PFS in 19/33 (57.6%) trials (p = 0.398), and with OS in 22/31 (71%) trials (p = 0.018). Our study identified key PRO domains that can be potentially used as primary endpoint in MM RCTs. Additionally, significant association between PROs and OS highlight the importance of integrating PROs to better capture treatment efficacy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39644334What 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.