{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,2,9]],"date-time":"2026-02-09T18:59:07Z","timestamp":1770663547506,"version":"3.49.0"},"reference-count":34,"publisher":"Springer Science and Business Media LLC","issue":"1","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]],"date-time":"2025-02-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1738800000000},"content-version":"tdm","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"},{"start":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]],"date-time":"2025-02-06T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1738800000000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"https:\/\/creativecommons.org\/licenses\/by\/4.0"}],"funder":[{"name":"the establishment and application of a detection method for minimal residual disease in multiple myeloma based on second-generation sequencing technology","award":["YGLX202309"],"award-info":[{"award-number":["YGLX202309"]}]}],"content-domain":{"domain":["link.springer.com"],"crossmark-restriction":false},"short-container-title":["Blood Res."],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,12]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Background<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>t(11;14) is considered a standard risk factor in multiple myeloma (MM). However, recent studies suggested that its impact in the context of novel agents remained controversial.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>This retrospective analysis examined the clinical profiles of 375 newly diagnosed patients with MM and compared the outcomes between those with t(11;14) and those with normal cytogenetics.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Results<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>The median progression-free survival (PFS) of the 84 patients with t(11;14) was 36\u00a0months (95% confidence interval (CI), 23.5\u201348.5), which was significantly shorter than the median PFS of 65\u00a0months (95% CI, 23.0\u2013107.0) for the 59 patients with normal cytogenetics (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.011). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached in either group (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.977). When combined with 1q21\u2009+\u2009, t(11;14) showed a trend toward poorer PFS (median PFS: 36 vs. 65\u00a0months; <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.130). In the presence of high-risk cytogenetics (HRCAs), t(11;14) was associated with a worse PFS (median PFS: 9 vs. 38\u00a0months, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.015) and a trend toward shorter OS (median OS: 33 vs. 49\u00a0months, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009=\u20090.096). Multivariate analysis indicated that t(11;14) was a poor prognostic factor for PFS. 1q21\u2009+\u2009was a detrimental prognostic factor, particularly in the t(11;14) group. Autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) may be a beneficial treatment option for patients with t(11;14).<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>\n          <jats:sec>\n            <jats:title>Conclusion<\/jats:title>\n            <jats:p>In this study, patients with MM with t(11;14) demonstrated poorer PFS than those with normal cytogenetics. Further investigations are required to evaluate the impact of t(11;14) in patients newly diagnosed with MM in the era of novel agents.<\/jats:p>\n          <\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]],"date-time":"2025-02-06T09:30:32Z","timestamp":1738834232000},"update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/springer_crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":1,"title":["Is t(11;14) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma a favorable outcome in the novel agent era?"],"prefix":"10.1007","volume":"60","author":[{"given":"Ye","family":"Li","sequence":"first","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Jingjing","family":"Deng","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Yuan","family":"Jian","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Zhiyao","family":"Zhang","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]},{"given":"Wenming","family":"Chen","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[],"role":[{"role":"author","vocabulary":"crossref"}]}],"member":"297","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]]},"reference":[{"key":"56_CR1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Rajkumar SV. Multiple myeloma: 2022 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management. Am J Hematol. 2022;97:1086\u20131107.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/ajh.26590.","DOI":"10.1002\/ajh.26590"},{"key":"56_CR2","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Terragna C, Poletti A, Solli V, et al. Multi-dimensional scaling techniques unveiled gain1q&loss13q co-occurrence in Multiple Myeloma patients with specific genomic, transcriptional and adverse clinical features. Nat Commun. 2024;15:1551.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41467-024-45000-z.","DOI":"10.1038\/s41467-024-45000-z"},{"key":"56_CR3","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Clarke SE, Fuller KA, Erber WN. Chromosomal defects in multiple myeloma. Blood Rev. 2024;64:101168.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.blre.2024.101168.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.blre.2024.101168"},{"key":"56_CR4","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Munshi NC, Anderson KC, Bergsagel PL, et al. Consensus recommendations for risk stratification in multiple myeloma: report of the International Myeloma Workshop Consensus Panel 2. Blood. 2011;117:4696\u20134700.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1182\/blood-2010-10-300970.","DOI":"10.1182\/blood-2010-10-300970"},{"key":"56_CR5","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Dispenzieri A, Rajkumar SV, Gertz MA, et al. Treatment of newly diagnosed multiple myeloma based on Mayo Stratification of Myeloma and Risk-adapted Therapy (mSMART): consensus statement. Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:323\u2013341.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.4065\/82.3.323.","DOI":"10.4065\/82.3.323"},{"key":"56_CR6","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Shah V, Sherborne AL, Walker BA, et al. Prediction of outcome in newly diagnosed myeloma: a meta-analysis of the molecular profiles of 1905 trial patients. Leukemia, 2018;32:102\u2013110.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/leu.2017.179.","DOI":"10.1038\/leu.2017.179"},{"key":"56_CR7","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Avet-Loiseau H, Durie BGM, Cavo M, et al. Combining fluorescent hybridization data with ISS staging improves risk assessment in myeloma: an International Myeloma Working Group collaborative project. Leukemia. 2013;27:711\u2013717.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/leu.2012.282.","DOI":"10.1038\/leu.2012.282"},{"key":"56_CR8","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Puertas B, Gonz\u00e1lez-Calle V, Sobejano-Fuertes E, et al. Multiple myeloma with t(11;14): impact of novel agents on outcome. Blood Cancer J. 2023;13:40.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41408-023-00807-9.","DOI":"10.1038\/s41408-023-00807-9"},{"key":"56_CR9","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Diamantidis MD, Papadaki S, Hatjiharissi E. Exploring the current molecular landscape and management of multiple myeloma patients with the t(11;14) translocation. Front Oncol. 2022;12:934008.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fonc.2022.934008.","DOI":"10.3389\/fonc.2022.934008"},{"key":"56_CR10","first-page":"2950","volume":"12","author":"S Bal","year":"2022","unstructured":"Bal S, Kumar SK, Fonseca R, et al. Multiple myeloma with t(11;14): unique biology and evolving landscape. Am J Cancer Res. 2022;12:2950\u201365.","journal-title":"Am J Cancer Res"},{"key":"56_CR11","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Greipp PR, San Miguel J, Durie BG, et al. International staging system for multiple myeloma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:3412\u20133420.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/JCO.2005.04.242.","DOI":"10.1200\/JCO.2005.04.242"},{"key":"56_CR12","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Kleber M, Ntanasis-Stathopoulos I, Terpos E. The Role of t(11;14) in Tailoring Treatment Decisions in Multiple Myeloma. Cancers (Basel). 2023;15:5829.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3390\/cancers15245829.","DOI":"10.3390\/cancers15245829"},{"key":"56_CR13","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Daudignon A, Cuccuini W, Bracquemart C, Godon C, Quilichini B, Penther D. Cytogenetics in the management of multiple Myeloma: The guidelines from the Groupe Francophone de Cytog\u00e9n\u00e9tique H\u00e9matologique (GFCH). Curr Res Transl Med. 2023;71:103427.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.retram.2023.103427.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.retram.2023.103427"},{"key":"56_CR14","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Sasaki K, Lu G, Saliba RM, et al. Impact of t(11;14)(q13;q32) on the outcome of autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation in multiple myeloma. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2013;19:1227\u20131232.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.bbmt.2013.05.017.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bbmt.2013.05.017"},{"key":"56_CR15","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gao W, Du J, Liu J, et al. What Multiple Myeloma With t(11;14) Should Be Classified Into in Novel Agent Era: Standard or Intermediate Risk? Front Oncol. 2020;10:538126.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fonc.2020.538126.","DOI":"10.3389\/fonc.2020.538126"},{"key":"56_CR16","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Atrash S, Flahavan EM, Xu T, et al. Treatment patterns and outcomes according to cytogenetic risk stratification in patients with multiple myeloma: a real-world analysis. Blood Cancer J. 2022;12:46.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/s41408-022-00638-0.","DOI":"10.1038\/s41408-022-00638-0"},{"key":"56_CR17","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Liu Y, Gao L, Lai Y, et al. Is t(11;14)(q13;q32) good or bad for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma? Chin Med J (Engl). 2023;136:96\u201398.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1097\/cm9.0000000000002159.","DOI":"10.1097\/cm9.0000000000002159"},{"key":"56_CR18","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Bal S, Giri S, Godby KN, Costa LJ. Impact of t(11;14) as a sole and concomitant abnormality on outcomes in multiple myeloma. Br J Haematol. 2021;195:e113-e116.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/bjh.17627.","DOI":"10.1111\/bjh.17627"},{"key":"56_CR19","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Pawlyn C, Melchor L, Murison A, et al. Coexistent hyperdiploidy does not abrogate poor prognosis in myeloma with adverse cytogenetics and may precede IGH translocations. Blood. 2015;125:831\u2013840.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1182\/blood-2014-07-584268.","DOI":"10.1182\/blood-2014-07-584268"},{"key":"56_CR20","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Sonneveld P, Avet-Loiseau H, Lonial S, et al. Treatment of multiple myeloma with high-risk cytogenetics: a consensus of the International Myeloma Working Group. Blood. 2016;127:2955\u20132962.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1182\/blood-2016-01-631200.","DOI":"10.1182\/blood-2016-01-631200"},{"key":"56_CR21","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Boyd KD, Ross FM, Chiecchio L, et al. A novel prognostic model in myeloma based on co-segregating adverse FISH lesions and the ISS: analysis of patients treated in the MRC Myeloma IX trial. Leukemia. 2012;26:349\u2013355.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/leu.2011.204.","DOI":"10.1038\/leu.2011.204"},{"key":"56_CR22","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Takamatsu H, Yamashita T, Kurahashi S, et al. Clinical Implications of t(11;14) in Patients with Multiple Myeloma Undergoing Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2019;25:474\u2013479.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.bbmt.2018.11.003.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.bbmt.2018.11.003"},{"key":"56_CR23","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Saini N, Ma J, Milton DR, et al. Impact of Autologous Transplantation in Patients with Multiple Myeloma with t(11;14): A Propensity-Score Matched Analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2019;25:6781\u20136787.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1158\/1078-0432.Ccr-19-0706.","DOI":"10.1158\/1078-0432.Ccr-19-0706"},{"key":"56_CR24","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Leiba M, Duek A, Amariglio N, et al. Translocation t(11;14) in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma: Is it always favorable? Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2016;55:710\u2013718.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/gcc.22372.","DOI":"10.1002\/gcc.22372"},{"key":"56_CR25","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Chng WJ, Dispenzieri A, Chim CS, et al. IMWG consensus on risk stratification in multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2014;28:269\u2013277.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/leu.2013.247.","DOI":"10.1038\/leu.2013.247"},{"key":"56_CR26","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Lakshman A, Alhaj Moustafa M, Rajkumar SV, et al. Natural history of t(11;14) multiple myeloma. Leukemia. 2018;32:131\u2013138.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1038\/leu.2017.204.","DOI":"10.1038\/leu.2017.204"},{"key":"56_CR27","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Jian Y, Zhang Z, Zhou H, et al. CD20 expression: A risk stratification factor for newly diagnosed multiple myeloma with t(11;14). Front Oncol. 2022;12:1061438.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.3389\/fonc.2022.1061438.","DOI":"10.3389\/fonc.2022.1061438"},{"key":"56_CR28","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Fonseca R, Blood EA, Oken MM, et al. Myeloma and the t(11;14)(q13;q32); evidence for a biologically defined unique subset of patients. Blood. 2002;99:3735\u20133741.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1182\/blood.v99.10.3735.","DOI":"10.1182\/blood.v99.10.3735"},{"key":"56_CR29","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Lim KJ, Wellard C, Talaulikar D, et al. The prognostic impact of t(11;14) in multiple myeloma: A real-world analysis from the Australian Lymphoma Leukaemia Group (ALLG) and the Australian Myeloma and Related Diseases Registry (MRDR). EJHaem. 2023;4:639\u2013646.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/jha2.742.","DOI":"10.1002\/jha2.742"},{"key":"56_CR30","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Gran C, Uttervall K, Borg Bruchfeld J, et al. Translocation (11;14) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma, time to reclassify this standard risk chromosomal aberration? Eur J Haematol. 2019;103:588\u2013596.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/ejh.13325.","DOI":"10.1111\/ejh.13325"},{"key":"56_CR31","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Shin HJ, Kim K, Lee JJ, et al. The t(11;14)(q13;q32) translocation as a poor prognostic parameter for autologous stem cell transplantation in myeloma patients with extramedullary plasmacytoma. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2015;15:227\u2013235.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.clml.2014.12.007.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.clml.2014.12.007"},{"key":"56_CR32","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Bazarbachi AH, Avet-Loiseau H, Harousseau JL, Bazarbachi A, Mohty M. Precision medicine for multiple myeloma: The case for translocation (11;14). Cancer Treat Rev. 2024;130:102823.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1016\/j.ctrv.2024.102823.","DOI":"10.1016\/j.ctrv.2024.102823"},{"key":"56_CR33","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Bahlis NJ, Baz R, Harrison SJ, et al. Phase I Study of Venetoclax Plus Daratumumab and Dexamethasone, With or Without Bortezomib, in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma With and Without t(11;14). J Clin Oncol. 2021;39:3602\u20133612.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1200\/jco.21.00443.","DOI":"10.1200\/jco.21.00443"},{"key":"56_CR34","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","unstructured":"Kumar S, Kaufman JL, Gasparetto C, et al. Efficacy of venetoclax as targeted therapy for relapsed\/refractory t(11;14) multiple myeloma. Blood. 2017;130:2401\u20132409.https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1182\/blood-2017-06-788786.","DOI":"10.1182\/blood-2017-06-788786"}],"container-title":["Blood Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/article\/10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8\/fulltext.html","content-type":"text\/html","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/content\/pdf\/10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8.pdf","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]],"date-time":"2025-02-06T09:30:38Z","timestamp":1738834238000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/link.springer.com\/10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]]},"references-count":34,"journal-issue":{"issue":"1","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2025,12]]}},"alternative-id":["56"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1007\/s44313-025-00056-8","relation":{},"ISSN":["2287-979X","2288-0011"],"issn-type":[{"value":"2287-979X","type":"print"},{"value":"2288-0011","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2025,2,6]]},"assertion":[{"value":"29 July 2024","order":1,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"10 January 2025","order":2,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"value":"6 February 2025","order":3,"name":"first_online","label":"First Online","group":{"name":"ArticleHistory","label":"Article History"}},{"order":1,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Declarations"}},{"value":"This study was approved by the Medical Ethics Committee of Beijing Chaoyang Hospital. We followed patients through an electronic medical record system without disturbing them in any way or interfering with their treatment. Informed consent was not required because the data were anonymized.","order":2,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Ethics approval and consent to participate"}},{"value":"The authors declare no competing interests.","order":3,"name":"Ethics","group":{"name":"EthicsHeading","label":"Competing interests"}}],"article-number":"11"}}