ArticleScientific reports2026
Real-world analysis of multiple myeloma treatments in England using the Cancer Analysis System registry.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Real World Data and Its Impact on the Management of Plasma Cell Dyscrasias.Current hematologic malignancy reports · 2026Review
- Hepatotoxicity Profile of Bortezomib-Containing Regimens for First-Line Multiple Myeloma Treatment.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This retrospective analysis of the Cancer Analysis System registry in England describes the characteristics, systemic anti-cancer therapy (SACT) use, and survival outcomes of patients with multiple myeloma (MM), overall, by therapy line (L), and by autologous stem cell therapy (ASCT) status. Of 20,240 patients not on Cancer Drugs Fund therapies between January 2014 and December 2019, 12,095 had ≥ 1 SACT record and 3,419 received ASCT. Overall, regimens were aligned with national recommendations, but treatment sequencing differed by ASCT status, with 99.3% of ASCT patients subsequently receiving bortezomib-based regimens vs. 83.5% of non-ASCT patients. Time to next treatment or death decreased from 17.3 months at 1 L to 5.6 at 4 L, and was 47.4 months in patients receiving ASCT vs. 13.4 in non-ASCT patients at 1 L. Median overall survival also decreased by line of therapy, from 44.5 months at 1 L to 11.5 at 4 L. Approximately 77% of patients receiving ASCT survived > 60 months vs. 28% of non-ASCT patients. This study describes the real-world treatment landscape and survival outcomes for patients with MM on NHS funded treatments in England, highlighting differences between patients receiving ASCT and those not receiving it. It also demonstrates important data limitations and considerations for improvement.
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.