ArticleAnnals of hematology2026
A mortality model for relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: emulation of subjective life expectancy criteria from a clinical trial in real-world data.
Article in Annals of hematology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients with limited life expectancy (LE) are often excluded from oncology trials based on subjective judgment, posing a challenge when contextualizing trial findings with real-world data (RWD). This study evaluated the feasibility of modeling mortality in RWD for relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) to replicate patient exclusion (LE < 6 months) for application in an external control arm study.A targeted literature review (TLR, January 2016-March 2022) was performed to identify mortality prediction models in RRMM. Because no suitable model was found, a de novo mortality model was developed using the COTA database.Twenty-one prognostic factors identified via literature review and clinical experts were included in the models. Cox proportional hazards models with bootstrap validation to correct for optimism were used to identify the best-performing model. A threshold of ≥50% predicted mortality probability within 6 months of the start of the line of therapy (LOT) was used for sensitivity and specificity estimates.Patients (N = 1,112) contributed 2,626 LOTs. A model with the top 20 prognostic factors maximized concordance and accuracy while achieving pre-specified performance thresholds, except for the F1 score. The predicted and observed 6-month mortality probability were both 26%.Mortality prediction for RRMM remains challenging with RWD. The de novo model exhibited strong discrimination performance but low F1 score, suggesting it may be useful to identify patients at highest risk who may be least likely to meet trial LE criteria.
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.