Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 532

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Association of Minimal Residual Disease With Superior Survival Outcomes in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-analysis

Open access
Munshi, Nikhil C., Avet-Loiseau, Herve, Rawstron, Andy C., Owen, Roger G., Child, J. Anthony, Thakurta, Anjan, Sherrington, Paul, Samur, Mehmet Kemal, Georgieva, Anna, Anderson, Kenneth C., Gregory, Walter M.·2017·JAMA Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Numerous studies have evaluated the prognostic value of minimal residual disease (MRD) in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Most studies were small and varied in terms of patient population, treatment, and MRD assessment methods. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the utility of MRD detection in patients with newly diagnosed MM. DATA SOURCES: A Medline search was conducted for articles published in English between January 1990 and January 2016. STUDY SELECTION: Eligible studies reported MRD status and progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) in 20 or more patients following treatment. Among 405 articles identified, 21 met the initial eligibility criteria and were included in the analysis. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Information on patient characteristics, treatment, MRD assessment, and outcomes were extracted using a standard form. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The impact of MRD status on PFS and OS was assessed by pooling data from relevant trials. Data were adjusted to allow for different proportions of patients with MRD in different studies, and analyzed using the Peto method. Forest plots were created based on Cox model analysis. Other prespecified research questions were addressed qualitatively. RESULTS: Fourteen studies (n = 1273) provided data on the impact of MRD on PFS, and 12 studies (n = 1100) on OS. Results were reported specifically in patients who had achieved conventional complete response (CR) in 5 studies for PFS (n = 574) and 6 studies for OS (n = 616). An MRD-negative status was associated with significantly better PFS overall (hazard ratio [HR], 0.41; 95% CI, 0.36-0.48; P < .001) and in studies specifically looking at CR patients (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.34-0.56; P < .001). Overall survival was also favorable in MRD-negative patients overall (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.46-0.71; P < .001) and in CR patients (HR, 0.47; 95% CI, 0.33-0.67; P < .001). Tests of heterogeneity found no significant differences among the studies for PFS and OS. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Minimal residual disease-negative status after treatment for newly diagnosed MM is associated with long-term survival. These findings provide quantitative evidence to support the integration of MRD assessment as an end point in clinical trials of MM.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3160

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 532

Metadata

Authors
Munshi, N. C., Avet-Loiseau, H., Rawstron, A. C., Owen, R. G., Child, J. A., Thakurta, A., Sherrington, P., Samur, M. K., Georgieva, A., Anderson, K. C., & Gregory, W. M.
Venue
JAMA Oncology
Published
2017-01-01
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
28
ISSN
2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2518827451
Cited by
532
References
0
FWCI
35.55
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Association of Minimal Residual Disease With Superior Survival Outcomes in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3160
The paper
Munshi, N. C., Avet-Loiseau, H., Rawstron, A. C., Owen, R. G., Child, J. A., Thakurta, A., Sherrington, P., Samur, M. K., Georgieva, A., Anderson, K. C., & Gregory, W. M. (2017). Association of Minimal Residual Disease With Superior Survival Outcomes in Patients With Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-analysis. JAMA Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3160

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.