Monoclonal Antibodies in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma and Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance: Current Status and Future Directions
Rattachement africain : it. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) targeting several cellular receptors have significantly improved the prognosis of multiple myeloma (MM). Their high effectiveness and safety raise the question of whether earlier therapeutic intervention in monoclonal gammopathy of undetermined significance (MGUS) and smoldering multiple myeloma (SMM) influences the natural course of the disease. MM is preceded by clinically recognized conditions such as MGUS and SMM. Numerous studies are investigating the disease biology and immune profile of SMM and MGUS to unravel the intricate relationship between immunosurveillance and disease progression. The standard approach to MGUS and SMM remains close observation. Early studies indicate benefits in terms of progression or even survival for promptly treating high-risk SMM patients. Ongoing debates are focused on which patients with SMM and MGUS to treat, as well as on determining the optimal therapeutic approach. The first approach aims to cure by attempting to eliminate the pathological clone, while the second approach is preventive, aiming to manage disease progression to active MM and restore the immune system. In this review, we focus on the available and emerging data on early treatment, particularly with MoAbs alone or in combination with other therapies, in SMM and MGUS patients.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Monoclonal Antibodies in Smoldering Multiple Myeloma and Monoclonal Gammopathy of Undetermined Significance: Current Status and Future Directions
- Date Crossref
- 06/07/2024
- Éditeur
- MDPI AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.