↓ Skip to main content

Plasma Cell Dyscrasias

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 7: Multiple Myeloma Minimal Residual Disease
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Multiple Myeloma Minimal Residual Disease
Chapter number 7
Book title
Plasma Cell Dyscrasias
Published in
Cancer treatment and research, January 2016
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-40320-5_7
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-940318-2, 978-3-31-940320-5, 978-3-31-940318-2, 978-3-31-940320-5
Authors

Bruno Paiva, Ramón García-Sanz, Jesús F. San Miguel, Paiva, Bruno, García-Sanz, Ramón, San Miguel, Jesús F.

Abstract

Assessment of minimal residual disease (MRD) is becoming standard diagnostic care for potentially curable neoplasms such as some acute leukemias as well as chronic myeloid and lymphocytic leukemia. Although multiple myeloma (MM) remains as an incurable disease, around half of the patients achieve complete remission (CR), and recent data suggests increasing rates of curability with "total-therapy-like" programs. This landscape is likely to be improved with the advent of new antibodies and small molecules. Therefore, conventional serological and morphological techniques have become suboptimal for sensitive evaluation of highly effective treatment strategies. Although, existing data suggests that MRD could be used as a biomarker to evaluate treatment efficacy, help on therapeutic decisions, and act as surrogate for overall survival, the role of MRD in MM is still a matter of extensive debate. Here, we review the different levels of remission used to define depth of response in MM and their clinical significance, as well as the prognostic value and unique characteristics of MRD detection using immunophenotypic, molecular, and imaging techniques. Key facts The higher efficacy of new treatment strategies for MM demand the incorporation of highly sensitive techniques to monitor treatment efficacy MRD could be used as a more potent surrogate biomarker for survival than standard CR We need to understand the pros and cons of the different MRD techniques The time has come to incorporate highly sensitive, cost-effective, readily available, and standardized MRD techniques into clinical trials to assess its role in therapeutic decisions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Unknown 36 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 24%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Other 3 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 5%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 12 32%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 38%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 11%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Neuroscience 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 14 38%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,462,982
of 22,977,819 outputs
Outputs from Cancer treatment and research
#95
of 167 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#231,982
of 394,405 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Cancer treatment and research
#14
of 25 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,977,819 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 167 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 394,405 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 25 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 40th percentile – i.e., 40% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.