↓ Skip to main content

Diagnosis and Management of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia: Mayo Stratification of Macroglobulinemia and Risk-Adapted Therapy (mSMART) Guidelines 2016

Overview of attention for article published in JAMA Oncology, September 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (96th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (72nd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
137 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
googleplus
2 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
110 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
127 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.
Title
Diagnosis and Management of Waldenström Macroglobulinemia: Mayo Stratification of Macroglobulinemia and Risk-Adapted Therapy (mSMART) Guidelines 2016
Published in
JAMA Oncology, September 2017
DOI 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.5763
Pubmed ID
Authors

Prashant Kapoor, Stephen M. Ansell, Rafael Fonseca, Asher Chanan-Khan, Robert A. Kyle, Shaji K. Kumar, Joseph R. Mikhael, Thomas E. Witzig, Michelle Mauermann, Angela Dispenzieri, Sikander Ailawadhi, A. Keith Stewart, Martha Q. Lacy, Carrie A. Thompson, Francis K. Buadi, David Dingli, William G. Morice, Ronald S. Go, Dragan Jevremovic, Taimur Sher, Rebecca L. King, Esteban Braggio, Ann Novak, Vivek Roy, Rhett P. Ketterling, Patricia T. Greipp, Martha Grogan, Ivana N. Micallef, P. Leif Bergsagel, Joseph P. Colgan, Nelson Leung, Wilson I. Gonsalves, Yi Lin, David J. Inwards, Suzanne R. Hayman, Grzegorz S. Nowakowski, Patrick B. Johnston, Steven J. Russell, Svetomir N. Markovic, Steven R. Zeldenrust, Yi L. Hwa, John A. Lust, Luis F. Porrata, Thomas M. Habermann, S. Vincent Rajkumar, Morie A. Gertz, Craig B. Reeder

Abstract

Waldenström macroglobulinemia (WM), an IgM-associated lymphoplasmacytic lymphoma, has witnessed several practice-altering advances in recent years. With availability of a wider array of therapies, the management strategies have become increasingly complex. Our multidisciplinary team appraised studies published or presented up to December 2015 to provide consensus recommendations for a risk-adapted approach to WM, using a grading system. Waldenström macroglobulinemia remains a rare, incurable cancer, with a heterogeneous disease course. The major classes of effective agents in WM include monoclonal antibodies, alkylating agents, purine analogs, proteasome inhibitors, immunomodulatory drugs, and mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitors. However, the highest-quality evidence from rigorously conducted randomized clinical trials remains scant. Recognizing the paucity of data, we advocate participation in clinical trials, if available, at every stage of WM. Specific indications exist for initiation of therapy. Outside clinical trials, based on the synthesis of available evidence, we recommend bendamustine-rituximab as primary therapy for bulky disease, profound hematologic compromise, or constitutional symptoms attributable to WM. Dexamethasone-rituximab-cyclophosphamide is an alternative, particularly for nonbulky WM. Routine rituximab maintenance should be avoided. Plasma exchange should be promptly initiated before cytoreduction for hyperviscosity-related symptoms. Stem cell harvest for future use may be considered in first remission for patients 70 years or younger who are potential candidates for autologous stem cell transplantation. At relapse, retreatment with the original therapy is reasonable in patients with prior durable responses (time to next therapy ≥3 years) and good tolerability to previous regimen. Ibrutinib is efficacious in patients with relapsed or refractory disease harboring MYD88 L265P mutation. In the absence of neuropathy, a bortezomib-rituximab-based option is reasonable for relapsed or refractory disease. In select patients with chemosensitive disease, autologous stem cell transplantation should be considered at first or second relapse. Everolimus and purine analogs are suitable options for refractory or multiply relapsed WM. Our recommendations are periodically updated as new, clinically relevant information emerges.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 137 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 127 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Unknown 126 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 17 13%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Other 13 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 9%
Student > Postgraduate 11 9%
Other 29 23%
Unknown 30 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 56 44%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 9 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 5 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 3%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 4 3%
Other 15 12%
Unknown 34 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 89. 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 17 December 2021.
All research outputs
#481,549
of 25,552,205 outputs
Outputs from JAMA Oncology
#790
of 3,332 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,105
of 324,896 outputs
Outputs of similar age from JAMA Oncology
#29
of 103 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,552,205 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 98th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,332 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 84.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% 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 324,896 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 103 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 72% of its contemporaries.