ArticleDiscover oncology2025
Efficacy of maintenance or consolidation therapy for multiple myeloma based on proteasome inhibitors: a meta-analysis.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
backgroundThis study assessed the efficacy of proteasome inhibitors (PIs) in both maintenance and consolidation therapies for MM patients.
methodsA comprehensive search across multiple databases was conducted, including PubMed, Science Direct, Google Scholar, CNKI, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, and others, to identify randomized controlled trials published in both Chinese and English languages that examined the use of PIs in either consolidation or maintenance therapy for multiple myeloma. The effectiveness outcomes assessed included complete response (CR), very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR), partial response (PR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS).
resultsOur analysis comprised four (4) randomized controlled trials investigating maintenance therapy and six (6) randomized controlled trials assessing consolidation therapy, including data from 4711 patients. PIS-based treatments significantly improved PFS and OS compared to the control group. PI-based consolidation therapy significantly prolonged PFS. In maintenance therapy, both PIs improved PFS and OS relative to the observation group. PIs significantly improved the achievements of CR in patients compared to the control group. CR attainment in maintenance therapy appeared slightly less effective than in consolidation therapy. PIs significantly improved ≥ VGPR in patients compared to the control group. Consolidation therapy demonstrated a greater improvement in ≥ VGPR compared to maintenance therapy.
conclusionTreatment with PI-based maintenance or consolidation therapy showed improvements in CR, ≥ VGPR, PFS, and OS in patients with MM. However, it is noteworthy that PIs-based maintenance and consolidation therapy were associated with an increased risk of ≥ grade 3 adverse events.
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.