ReviewClinical and experimental medicine2025
Multi-omics profiling and AI-driven clinically deployable risk models in MGUS and smoldering myeloma.
Review in Clinical and experimental medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Comparative Molecular Insights and Computational Modeling of Multiple Myeloma and Osteosarcoma.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
- Genomic innovations in cancer prevention, diagnosis, prognosis and precision therapeutics.Frontiers in genetics · 2026Review
- AI-enabled D-dimeromics in precision breast oncology: a transformative framework for the identification, stratification, and prognostication of ultra-high-risk disease phenotypes.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS), smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM), and multiple myeloma (MM) form a continuum of plasma cell disorders, with progression from MGUS to MM being difficult to predict. Current risk stratification models, largely based on clinical, laboratory, and cytogenetic markers, fail to capture the molecular complexity underlying disease progression, limiting their predictive accuracy. Recent advancements in multi-omics technologies, encompassing genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, and metabolomics, have provided deeper insights into the molecular drivers of these conditions. The integration of artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) further enhances this understanding, offering new avenues for dynamic, personalized risk prediction. AI-based approaches that incorporate multi-omics data have the potential to identify novel biomarkers and predict disease outcomes with greater precision. These advancements could revolutionize risk stratification by providing a more individualized and dynamic framework for patient monitoring and treatment. However, the clinical adoption of AI and multi-omics tools is fraught with challenges, including the integration of complex data types, the need for standardized protocols, and concerns surrounding data privacy and algorithmic bias. Furthermore, evolving regulatory frameworks must accommodate the continuous learning capabilities of AI systems. This article explores the current limitations of risk stratification models in MGUS and SMM and examines the potential of multi-omics and AI to improve predictive accuracy. It also discusses the technical, ethical, and regulatory hurdles that must be overcome to enable the clinical implementation of these technologies, offering a roadmap for their future integration into patient care.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.