ArticleHealth science reports2025
Redefining Cure in Multiple Myeloma: Are We Chasing a Moving Target?
Article in Health science reports, 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.
- RNA-Based Therapeutic Strategies in Multiple Myeloma: From Molecular Targets to Delivery and Clinical Translation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Redefining Cure in Multiple Myeloma: Are We Chasing a Moving Target?Health science reports · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background and Aims: Multiple myeloma (MM), a clonal plasma cell malignancy, remains incurable despite significant therapeutic advances, including novel immunotherapies like chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy and bispecific antibodies. This perspective reevaluates the concept of "cure" in MM, challenging the traditional binary definition of complete disease eradication. The author proposes a dynamic, patient-centric model integrating sustained minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity, functional cure, and quality of life (QoL) to align clinical goals with biological realities. Methods: This perspective reviews current literature on MM pathophysiology, focusing on intratumoral heterogeneity and bone marrow microenvironment interactions as drivers of therapeutic resistance. It critiques existing cytotoxic and immunomodulatory paradigms and explores emerging strategies, including precision medicine, single-cell genomics, and artificial intelligence (AI)-driven risk stratification, to redefine therapeutic endpoints. Results: Novel immunotherapies achieve deep responses, with MRD negativity rates approaching 80% in some cohorts; however, relapse remains a significant challenge due to subclonal evolution and dormant MM clones. Current treatment paradigms fail to fully address these biological complexities, necessitating innovative approaches that combine therapies, target resistant clones, and incorporate patient-reported outcomes to balance efficacy with QoL. Conclusion: Reframing cure as a spectrum rather than an absolute state offers a more realistic framework for MM management. By leveraging precision medicine and integrating QoL considerations, clinicians and researchers can foster durable remissions and improve patient outcomes. This perspective advocates for a paradigm shift, urging the MM community to embrace biological complexity and redefine success in this evolving therapeutic landscape.
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.