Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41787687›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of haematology2026

Rate of MGUS Progression to Haematological Malignancies: A Systematic Review.

Stephen James Quinn, Chris Cardwell, Lesley Ann Anderson, Charlene McShane

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-Analysis
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of haematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing 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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

4 authors.

Stephen James QuinnCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1671-9947
Chris CardwellCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.
Lesley Ann AndersonBiostatistics & Health Data Science, Institute of Applied Health Sciences, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, Scotland.
Charlene McShaneCentre for Public Health, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, Northern Ireland.

Funding

Northern Ireland Department for the Economy
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) is an asymptomatic pre-cancerous condition that precedes plasma cell dyscrasias, including multiple myeloma (MM). Current clinical guidelines report that MGUS's rate of malignant progression to haematological malignancy (HM) is ~1% per year; however, reported rates have varied widely. To address this discrepancy, a systematic review was conducted, investigating MGUS's rate of malignant progression to HM and MM alone. Four electronic databases were searched from inception to 28 March 2024 for articles reporting these outcomes; articles were summarised using meta-analysis and narrative synthesis. Findings were incorporated from n = 46 studies, published between 1991 and 2024 and conducted across n = 17 countries. Median follow-up ranged from 1.3 to 34.2 years and sample sizes ranged from n = 63 to 17,963. In random-effects meta-analysis, n = 13 studies reported on MGUS progression to HM and n = 12 reported on progression to MM. The overall estimates of malignant progression events were 12 per 1000 person-years to HM, equivalent to 1.2% per year (95% CI: 1.0%-1.5%) and 8 per 1000 person-years to MM or 0.8% per year (95% CI: 0.7%-1.1%), with substantial heterogeneity between studies (I

Indexed as

Hematologic NeoplasmsMonoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined SignificanceDisease ProgressionHumansepidemiologymalignant progressionmonoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significancemyelomasystematic review

Identifiers

PMID41787687
PMCPMC13141670

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.