Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40325139›Full record

ArticleBone marrow transplantation2025

Attitudes and perspectives of oncologists about measurable residual disease testing in multiple myeloma: initiative for standardizing guidelines.

Aqeeb Ur Rehman, Fathima Shehnaz Ayoobkhan, Moazzam Shahzad, Muhammad Kashif Amin, Sara Shatnawi, Sohaib Irfan, Sibgha Gull Chaudhary, Faiz Anwer, Joseph P McGuirk, Mohamad Mohty and 3 more

Abstract readLetter
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Bone marrow transplantation, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

13 authors.

Aqeeb Ur RehmanDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3795-8998
Fathima Shehnaz AyoobkhanU.S Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Moazzam ShahzadU.S Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9609-6160
Muhammad Kashif AminDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Sara ShatnawiDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Sohaib IrfanDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Sibgha Gull ChaudharyDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.
Faiz AnwerU.S Myeloma Innovations Research Collaborative, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0001-6914-7439
Joseph P McGuirkDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-0539-4796
Mohamad MohtySorbonne University, Paris, France.ORCID 0000-0002-7264-808X
Nausheen AhmedDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0003-4336-4982
Al-Ola AbdallahDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-6603-185X
Muhammad Umair MushtaqDivision of Hematologic Malignancies and Cellular Therapeutics, University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City, KS, USA. mmushtaq@kumc.edu.ORCID 0000-0001-8122-0563

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Measurable residual disease (MRD) testing is emerging as a crucial prognostic and treatment-guiding tool in multiple myeloma (MM). Despite its potential, routine clinical adoption remains inconsistent. This study aimed to explore oncologists' perspectives on MRD testing and identify barriers and facilitators to its clinical integration. A cross-sectional, modified Delphi survey was conducted among hematologists and oncologists globally, and 115 responses were received. Our findings reveal significant variability in MRD testing, influenced primarily by specialty rather than geographic location, years of experience, or practice setting (academic vs community settings). Plasma cell-focused physicians were more likely to conduct routine MRD testing. Flow cytometry was the preferred testing methodology globally, with significant variations in acceptable negativity thresholds. The primary purpose of MRD testing was to guide treatment decisions; however, U.S. physicians employed it primarily to discuss results with patients. Key barriers to assessment included testing unavailability, lack of standardized guidelines, and, in non-U.S. settings, financial constraints. These findings highlight the need for consensus-driven guidelines to standardize MRD implementation, improve accessibility, and educate clinicians on its clinical utility. Addressing these gaps will be essential to leveraging MRD as a routine decision-making tool, ultimately optimizing patient outcomes in MM.

Indexed as

Attitude of Health PersonnelMultiple MyelomaNeoplasm, ResidualOncologistsCross-Sectional StudiesFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.