ArticleDiscover oncology2025
Clinical benefit loss in myeloma patients declining autologous stem cell transplantation: a real-world study.
Article in Discover oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Anti-myeloma activity of the CXCR4 antagonist WZ811.Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2026Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (ASCT) is a recommended treatment for multiple myeloma (MM). Currently, with multiple treatment alternatives, patients' prognosis has improved significantly compared to the pre-proteasome inhibitor period. However, this has raised deliberations on the value and timing of ASCT. Compared with Western countries, the proportion of Chinese patients undergoing ASCT is relatively low. Nevertheless, this situation allows us to observe the treatment outcomes of transplant-eligible (TE) patients who haven't received ASCT and explore the role of ASCT in patients with distinct clinicopathological features. This real-world analysis encompassed 1059 newly diagnosed MM patients from 2012 to 2022, among whom 480 were TE. These patients were categorized into the TE-ASCT group (158 received ASCT) and the TE-no-ASCT group (322 did not receive ASCT). Disease progression and treatment response are evaluated based on the definition of IMWG. We found that the progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly prolonged in TE-ASCT group compared to TE-no-ASCT group, but there was no significant difference in overall survival (OS). Further exploratory analyses revealed that ASCT conspicuously augmented the PFS of patients aged ≤ 60 years, featuring ISS stage II/III, 1q gain/amplification, and positive minimal residual disease (MRD). Nevertheless, for patients aged > 60 years, presenting with ISS stage I, high-risk cytogenetics, renal insufficiency, and negative MRD, ASCT did not confer PFS benefits. Our investigation furnishes evidence of the clinical superiority of ASCT for MM patients with disparate clinicopathological characteristics in the contemporary treatment era, laying a groundwork for individualized ASCT selection.
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.