| Title |
Salvage therapies in relapsed and/or refractory myeloma: what is current and what is the future?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
OncoTargets and therapy, August 2016
|
| DOI | 10.2147/ott.s110189 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nishitha Thumallapally, Hana Yu, Divya Asti, Adarsh Vennepureddy, Terenig Terjanian |
| Abstract |
The treatment landscape for multiple myeloma (MM) is evolving with our understanding of its pathophysiology. However, given the inevitable cohort heterogeneity in salvage therapy, response to treatment and overall prognoses tend to vary widely, making meaningful conclusions about treatment efficacy difficult to derive. Despite the hurdles in current research, progress is underway toward more targeted therapeutic approaches. Several new drugs with novel mechanism of action and less toxic profile have been developed in the past decade, with the potential for use as single agents or in synergy with other treatment modalities in MM therapy. As our discovery of these emerging therapies progresses, so too does our need to reshape our knowledge on knowing how to apply them. This review highlights some of the recent landmark changes in MM management with specific emphasis on salvage drugs available for relapsed and refractory MM and also discusses some of the upcoming cutting-edge therapies that are currently in various stages of clinical development. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 26 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 15% |
| Other | 3 | 12% |
| Researcher | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 12% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 4 | 15% |
| Unknown | 7 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 11 | 42% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 8% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 8% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 6 | 23% |
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 03 September 2016.
All research outputs
#17,286,379
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,146
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,533
of 381,029 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#35
of 91 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,016 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.9. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 52% of its peers.
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 381,029 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 91 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.