ReviewInternational journal of hematology2026
Smoldering multiple myeloma: advances in diagnosis and risk stratification, and evolving therapeutic strategies.
Review in International journal of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. 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
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) represents a heterogeneous precursor stage between monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance and symptomatic multiple myeloma (MM). Advances in diagnostic criteria, particularly the adoption of the SLiM-CRAB framework, have improved the distinction between SMM and MM and reduced the risk of misclassification. Contemporary risk stratification models, such as the Mayo 20/2/20 criteria and International Myeloma Working Group refinements, integrate both static and dynamic biomarkers to provide more accurate predictions of progression. Genomic and immunological studies have further revealed key drivers of disease evolution, patterns of clonal evolution, and immune dysregulation, which may guide therapeutic decisions. Clinical trials have demonstrated that early intervention with lenalidomide or daratumumab can delay progression. In contrast, intensive multi-agent regimens, such as those used in the GEM-CESAR and ASCENT trials, have achieved high rates of minimal residual disease negativity and suggest curative potential. Nevertheless, the long-term survival benefits of these strategies remain uncertain, and the risks of toxicity in asymptomatic patients require careful consideration. Ongoing studies, including CAR-PRISM and ImmunoPRISM, are evaluating cellular and antibody-based therapies for high-risk SMM. Collectively, these advances highlight the need for refined, individualized approaches that balance the benefits and risks in the management of SMM.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41175246What 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.