| Title |
Multiple Myeloma: Treatment is Getting Individualized
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion, July 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12288-015-0575-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
M. B. Agarwal |
| Abstract |
Multiple myeloma (MM) is a heterogeneous disease with varied outcome. The novel agents including two major classes of drugs; the immunomodulatory drugs and the proteasome inhibitors with unprecedented response rates, have replaced conventional chemotherapy. With monoclonal antibodies on the horizon, outcome of this disorder will further improve. Progression in risk stratification systems has made it possible to predict the disease course as well as outcome in myeloma patients with disease categorization into low to high risk. In addition, detection of minimal residual disease by serum free light chain assay, flow cytometry, molecular techniques like polymerase chain reaction and positron emission tomography scan is playing an important role in modifying the treatment. An extensive research in the disease biology has improved our knowledge regarding interplay between myeloma cells and elements of the bone marrow microenvironment which contribute to sustain proliferation and survival as well as de novo drug resistance. Again, insight into the role of genetic and epigenetic interactions in MM has exposed new molecular targets. All these have opened the gateway for novel therapeutic strategies with focus on risk based individualized therapy. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | 50% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 15 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Other | 3 | 20% |
| Researcher | 3 | 20% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Master | 2 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 2 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 4 | 27% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 3 | 20% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 7% |
| Immunology and Microbiology | 1 | 7% |
| Computer Science | 1 | 7% |
| Other | 2 | 13% |
| Unknown | 3 | 20% |
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 09 February 2016.
All research outputs
#18,810,041
of 23,975,976 outputs
Outputs from Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion
#237
of 457 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,268
of 266,317 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Indian Journal of Hematology and Blood Transfusion
#4
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,975,976 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 457 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.6. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% 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 266,317 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 5 of them.