Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39910509›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2025

Real-world outcomes of maintenance therapy post-autologous stem cell transplantation in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma.

Ka-Won Kang, Dae Sik Kim, Se Ryeon Lee, Mi Hwa Heo, Hyeon-Seok Eom, Jongheon Jung, Ji Hyun Lee, Sung-Hyun Kim, Youngil Koh, Chang-Ki Min and 9 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. The role of stem cells in precision medicine: next-generation cancer treatment.Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute · 2025
    Review
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

19 authors.

Ka-Won KangDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Dae Sik KimDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Guro Hospital, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Se Ryeon LeeDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Korea University Ansan Hospital, Ansan, Republic of Korea.
Mi Hwa HeoDivision of Hemato-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Dongsan Medical Center, Keimyung University School of Medicine, Daegu, Republic of Korea.
Hyeon-Seok EomDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Center for Hematologic Malignancy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Jongheon JungDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Center for Hematologic Malignancy, National Cancer Center, Goyang, Republic of Korea.
Ji Hyun LeeDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Sung-Hyun KimDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Dong-A University College of Medicine, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Youngil KohDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Chang-Ki MinHematology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul St. Mary's Hospital, College of Medicine, The Catholic University of Korea, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
Seung Shin LeeDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Wonkwang University Hospital, Iksan, Republic of Korea.
Sung-Nam LimDepartment of Internal Medicine, Inje University College of Medicine, Haeundae Paik Hospital, Busan, Republic of Korea.
Ho-Young YhimDivision of Hematology/Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Jeonbuk National University Medical School, Jeonju, Republic of Korea.
Myung-Won LeeDivision of Hematology and Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Chungnam National University Hospital, Daejeon, Republic of Korea.
Je-Jung LeeDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Hwasun, Jeollanam-do, Republic of Korea.
Sung-Hoon JungDepartment of Hematology-Oncology, Chonnam National University Hwasun Hospital, Chonnam National University Medical School, Gwangju, Hwasun, Jeollanam-do, Republic of Korea.
Soo-Mee BangDivision of Hematology and Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seongnam, Republic of Korea.
Kihyun KimDivision of Hematology-Oncology, Department of Medicine, Sungkyunkwan University School of Medicine, Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, Republic of Korea. kihyunkimk@gmail.com.
Korean Multiple Myeloma Working party [KMMWP]

Funding

Korea Health Industry Development Institute HE23C0024
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn the Republic of Korea, only lenalidomide, bortezomib, ixazomib, and thalidomide monotherapy are available as maintenance therapy post-autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT).

methodsTo determine whether maintenance therapy confers a survival benefit in the real world, we compared treatment outcomes according to the use and type of maintenance therapy in patients who underwent ASCT following frontline therapy with the triplet regimen of bortezomib, thalidomide, and dexamethasone for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma in 15 nationwide centers.

resultsA total of 512 patients were analyzed (no-maintenance group, n = 359, and maintenance group, n = 153 patients). Among those receiving maintenance therapy, 104 (68%) received thalidomide, 33 (21%) lenalidomide, and 16 (10%) bortezomib or ixazomib. The median progression-free survival (PFS) from the time of ASCT was 26.4 and 44.1 months in the no-maintenance and maintenance groups, respectively. In the multivariate analysis, the use of maintenance therapy was significantly associated with better PFS. After adjustment for the type and duration of maintenance therapy, the use of bortezomib or ixazomib was associated with better PFS than other drugs. Longer duration of therapy was associated with improved PFS. No statistically significant difference was observed in overall survival and secondary malignancy rates by use or type of maintenance.

conclusionDespite practical limitations, maintenance therapy after ASCT demonstrated a gain in PFS in the real world, and there was no clear increase in the risk of secondary malignancy. Therefore, it may be prudent to consider implementing maintenance therapy in a feasible manner.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsHematopoietic Stem Cell TransplantationMaintenance ChemotherapyMultiple MyelomaAdultAgedBoron CompoundsBortezomibDexamethasoneFemaleGlycineHumansLenalidomideMaleMiddle AgedProgression-Free SurvivalBoron CompoundsBortezomibDexamethasoneGlycineixazomibLenalidomideThalidomideAutologous stem cell transplantationBortezomibIxazomibLenalidomideMaintenanceMultiple myelomaThalidomide

Identifiers

PMID39910509
PMCPMC11796201

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.