ReviewCurrent oncology reports2025
Current State of Evidence on Definitions and Management of High-Risk Multiple Myeloma.
Review in Current oncology reports, 2025. 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.
- Activating RARβ to overcome immunomodulatory drug resistance in t(4;14) human myeloma.Leukemia · 2026Article
- Advances in the application of frailty scoring in the diagnosis and management of elderly patients with multiple myeloma (Review).Oncology reports · 2026Review
- Outcomes of Double-Hit and Single High-Risk Cytogenetic Newly Diagnosed Myeloma in Transplant-Eligible Patients.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2026Article
- Dynamic cytogenetic evolution in multiple myeloma: prognostic implications from diagnosis to first relapse.The oncologist · 2026Article
- FTO-Mediated m6A Demethylation of SERPINF1 Attenuates Multiple Myeloma Progression via the Wnt/β-Catenin Pathway.Journal of microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Tandem autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma: A historical perspective and current challenges.Annals of hematology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purpose of reviewThis review aims to address the subgroup of patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) who have high-risk multiple myeloma (HRMM) and continue to experience poor outcomes despite recent therapeutic advances. We will explore various clinical, biochemical, imaging, genetic, and dynamic features associated with high-risk status, along with the different risk stratification tools developed to identify HRMM patients. RECENT
findingsAlthough numerous parameters for defining HRMM have been proposed, a universally accepted definition remains absent. Studies have shown diverse treatment responses and varying outcomes in HRMM patients, prompting the development of tailored therapeutic approaches. Emerging evidence supports the need for refined definitions and more targeted strategies to improve HRMM management. HRMM patients represent an unmet need in NDMM treatment, and a standardized definition for HRMM is crucial for advancing research and clinical care. This review discusses current and future treatment options, the necessity for a consistent HRMM definition, and the importance of clinical trials focused on this high-risk group to bridge existing treatment gaps.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39937351What 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.