Table 3.
Initial MM vs. recurrent MM patients treated with T-VAD.
| Study | Data year | Tumor stage I/II/III |
Patients | Age (year) | Comparison | Test conditions and units | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initial | Relapse | Initial | Relapse | Initial | Relapse | ||||
| Zhai et al., 2012 [35] | 2004−2011 | 0/13/29∗ | 30 | 7 | 56 | 56 | T-VAD | T-VAD | ELISA VEGF (pg/ml) |
| Du et al., 2014 [36] |
Not clear | 0/ 6/32# | 26 | 7 | 58 | 58 | T-VAD | T-VAD | VEGF (pg/ml) |
∗Zhang N, Shen Ti, editor. Blood disease diagnosis and efficacy standards. Version 2. Beijing: Science Press, 1998;373.376 [37]; ∗∗Zhang Zhinan, Sen Ti. Blood disease diagnosis and efficacy standards. 3rd edition Beijing: Science Press. 2007, 232−235 [38]; Δ Durie BG Salmon SE. A clinical staging system for multiple myeloma. Correlation of measured myeloma cell mass with presenting clinical features response to treatment and survival. Cancer, 1975, 36:842−854 [39]; # Blood Physicians Association, Hematology Branch of Chinese Medical Association, Multiple myeloma working group in China. China guidelines for diagnosis and treatment of multiple myeloma (revised in 2013). Chin J Int Med, 2013, 52(9):791−795 [40].