↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Bortezomib-based vs non-bortezomib-based post-transplantation treatment in multiple myeloma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Phase III randomized controlled trials

Overview of attention for article published in OncoTargets and therapy, June 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
32 Mendeley
Title
Bortezomib-based vs non-bortezomib-based post-transplantation treatment in multiple myeloma patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of Phase III randomized controlled trials
Published in
OncoTargets and therapy, June 2015
DOI 10.2147/ott.s84828
Pubmed ID
Authors

Xiaoping Liu, Colin K He, Xiangyu Meng, Li He, Kaili Li, Qing Liang, Liang Shao, Shangqin Liu

Abstract

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of bortezomib-based vs non-bortezomib-based post-transplantation therapy in patients with multiple myeloma. Data of relevant randomized controlled trials assessing the effect of bortezomib as post-transplantation consolidation or maintenance therapy was obtained through a comprehensive search. The outcome measures included response rate, progression-free survival, overall survival, and adverse events (AEs). The hazard ratio (HR), Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) were applied to evaluate the effect of bortezomib in relation to the end points such as progression-free survival, overall survival, response rate, and AEs. Three randomized controlled trials comprising 1,518 participants were included in this study. Pooled ORs for the rates of overall response, and complete response and near complete response, were 1.85 and 1.75, respectively. Pooled HR for progression-free survival favored bortezomib-based therapy over non-bortezomib-based therapy (0.73, 95% CI: 0.67-0.81), while no statistically significant difference could be found between the two groups regarding the pooled HR for 3-year overall survival. Moreover, incidence rates of overall adverse events and grade 3 and 4 peripheral neuropathy were similar in the bortezomib-based groups and the non-bortezomib-based groups (P=0.12 and P=0.41, respectively). The corresponding cumulative meta-analyses of the rates of overall response rate, complete response and near complete response, and grades 3 and 4 peripheral neuropathy supported the superiority of bortezomib-based maintenance therapy over consolidation therapy. Bortezomib-based therapy after autologous stem cell transplantation, with tolerable AEs, could obviously improve the response as well as the outcome of multiple myeloma patients, particularly when bortezomib was administered as maintenance therapy.

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 32 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 32 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 25%
Other 6 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 13%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Other 6 19%
Unknown 2 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 19 59%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 2 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 6%
Economics, Econometrics and Finance 2 6%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 2 6%
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 26 June 2015.
All research outputs
#19,944,994
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from OncoTargets and therapy
#1,447
of 3,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#192,928
of 281,411 outputs
Outputs of similar age from OncoTargets and therapy
#40
of 71 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% 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 is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% 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 281,411 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 71 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.