ReviewHaematologica2026
Advances in biomarkers for mantle cell lymphoma in the era of targeted therapies.
Review in Haematologica, 2026. 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.
- Advances in targeted and cellular therapies for relapsed/refractory mantle cell lymphoma: immunotherapeutic strategies and challenges.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2026Review
- Mantle Cell Lymphoma with Persistent Massive Pleural Effusions Requiring Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and Bilateral Continuous Thoracic Drainage.Reports (MDPI) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Exciting therapeutic advances are transforming the mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) treatment landscape, with an expanding array of novel agents. Growing evidence demonstrates that MCL is a biologically heterogeneous disease ineffectively managed with historical uniform standard chemoimmunotherapy approaches. Furthermore, traditional prognosticators such as the MCL-International Prognostic index (MIPI), proliferation index Ki-67, and presence of TP53 aberrations remain valuable but are insufficient to fully capture disease complexity or guide personalized therapy. Biomarker technologies are evolving rapidly. Reflecting this technological renaissance, recent studies have identified a range of novel molecular and cytogenetic alterations that carry prognostic or therapeutic relevance in the context of both chemotherapy and novel agent delivery. Advances in measurable residual disease detection using polymerase chain reaction analysis, next-generation sequencing, and circulating tumor DNA are reshaping risk stratification and offer the potential to guide therapy intensity and duration. New information is emerging regarding the critical role of the tumor microenvironment and immune dysregulation in driving treatment resistance. Additionally, the expanding utility of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography by harnessing quantitative parameters and radiomic data offers new opportunities for multimodality risk stratification. Here, we comprehensively review the literature beyond established MCL prognosticators and provide an overview of these newer prognostic and predictive biomarkers for MCL in modern treatment paradigms, and their role in informing treatment decisions and future research directions.
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.