Jump to content

Talk:Multiple myeloma

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Snori (talk | contribs) at 19:12, 20 December 2018 (→Revert of good faith edits). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

WikiProject iconMedicine: Hematology-oncology B‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
BThis article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Hematology-oncology task force.
WikiProject iconVeterinary medicine Start‑class Mid‑importance
WikiProject iconThis article is within the scope of WikiProject Veterinary medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Veterinary medicine on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Veterinary medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Veterinary medicineTemplate:WikiProject Veterinary medicineVeterinary medicine
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
MidThis article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

.

Reviews

Numerous translational reviews in Blood this week: http://bloodjournal.org/content/125/20 - 15 May 2015‎

Relapse

Proposed edit: Following the sentence "Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor," add, "Identifying the levels of specific proteins may help doctors identify whether a patient will benefit from a proteasome inhibitor." Citation: doi:10.18632/oncoscience.356

I'd like to open this to discussion because the citation is primary research, so not ideal. However, the first sentence does not give readers any context as the significance of being a proteasome inhibitor or how physicians use that information. The purpose of this edit would be to help fill that gap. Thoughts? Cglife.trummler (talk) 22:43, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure there are better sources that are more compliant with WP:MEDRS. I find a fair number when searching Pubmed with "proteasome inhibitors" as MAJR term. JFW | T@lk 23:01, 14 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
No. We call this WP:REFSPAM. Please stop doing this. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 06:13, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Updating and expanding prognosis info

Two points:

1. The Prognosis section states "Overall the 5-year survival rate is around 35%". The source for this (63) states "Archived from the original on 11 January 2013." However, following the source link given leads to an article that notes at the top it has been updated on Jan 11, 2018. In that article, under the heading Prognosis it says "The 5-year relative survival rate is 46.6%." I am not expert enough to know if "overall" and "relative" have different meanings in this context, but it appears to me as if the survival rate has improved since the original source was written. Should this be updated?

2. The same source (https://emedicine.medscape.com/article/204369-overview#showall) also gives information on the difference in prognosis due to type of treatment:

The prognosis by treatment is as follows:

• Conventional therapy: Overall survival is approximately 3 years, and event-free survival is less than 2 years.

• High-dose chemotherapy with stem-cell transplantation: The overall survival rate is greater than 50% at 5 years.

This might be good information to include.

Grindle2095 (talk) 13:41, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Medscape isn't an ideal source. I agree that there must be a more recent MEDRS-compatible source present somewhere. JFW | T@lk 22:49, 27 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
How about SEER Cancer Statistics Review? (https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/) (Based on data up to 2014) You can see the relevant tables here: https://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2014/browse_csr.php?sectionSEL=18&pageSEL=sect_18_table.08.html Grindle2095 (talk) 06:58, 28 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Alcohol as a risk factor?

The WHO report used as a ref in our article says

"Associations have been reported between alcohol consumption and cancer of the cervix, endometrium, ovary, vulva and vagina, testis, brain, thyroid, and skin (malignant melanoma, basal cell carcinoma, and squamous cell carcinoma) as well as leukaemia and multiple myeloma [5]; however, few studies have examined these associations"

...which is very waffly, and seems to use as its reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK326568/?report=printable - which actually says:

"Two cohort studies, one in a group of radiological technologists exposed to ion- izing radiation in the USA (Freedman et al., 2003) and one in alcoholic women in Sweden (Sigvardsson et al., 1996), found no significant associations between the risk for melanoma and alcoholic beverage intake." (my emphasis).

Also see https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24469244 which found an inverse relationship. - Snori (talk) 08:54, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hum yes. Agree and will remove. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 12:50, 6 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Revert of good faith edits

User User:StevealexR1 just changed some ages that have been there for some time and had associated refs/cites. Presumably these support those figures, so even if this user *thinks* they know better the fact and the ref now don't match. Also added some slightly odd treatment options - these may be fine if backed up with refs. - Snori (talk) 19:12, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Talk:Multiple_myeloma&oldid=874661312"