# PROMISE: HCP commentary report

> 97 verified statements (16 from clinicians verified by NPI or staff page) from 9 commentary sources · 8 findings · updated Nov 2, 2026

## Report

- Trial: Predicting Progression of Developing Myeloma in a High-Risk Screened Population (PROMISE)
- NCT ID: NCT03689595
- Registry: https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03689595
- Sponsor: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
- Phase: Observational
- Status: Enrolling by invitation
- Version: v1.0.0, edition 1
- Accepted: 2026-11-02
- Last checked: 2026-11-02
- Release hash: 2e29448db86116fbf6a7ee30aeba74f35bb431682718accf7a98d1a6ab3d0bee

## Counts

- HCP commentary sources screened: 71
- Sources cited by verified statements: 13
- Verified statements: 97
- From speakers with a confirmed clinical role (verified by the NPI registry or their own institution's staff page): 16
- Findings: 8
- Named people in screened sources (unnamed speakers and accounts not counted): 8
- Voices cited: 7
- Cited voices identity-verified: 6
- Organisational or shared accounts (not counted as people): 4

Counts describe the retained sources. They do not estimate how many HCPs hold a view.

## Abstract

PROMISE examines progression from myeloma precursors to overt multiple myeloma in a high-risk screened population; discussion distinguishes research from routine screening. The report cites five physicians, four of them medical oncologists, including a clinician described by the sources as a PROMISE principal investigator; another speaker is described by their source as working for Dana-Farber, the trial’s sponsor. Further questions concern treatment after precursor detection and selective marrow-biopsy use. What progression evidence, risk definitions and follow-up protections would justify selective intervention without treating people unlikely to progress?

## Open Medical Affairs question

Which progression evidence, risk definitions and follow-up protections would justify moving from detection to selective intervention without treating people unlikely to progress?

Raised by the leading finding. The report shows what clinicians said and the sources behind it; it does not settle the question.

## Findings (titles)

- F1. Support for research screening is not a blanket recommendation for routine screening
- F2. Precursor detection does not itself justify treatment
- F3. Risk assessment needs timing, trajectories and selective use of marrow biopsy
- F4. The US high-risk cohort is justified by feasibility and population relevance
- F5. Unexpectedly high detection yield drives interest, but positivity is not progression
- F6. Patient-initiated access is paired with result communication and specialist follow-up
- F7. Familial concern leads to hypotheses about early, undetectable clones
- F8. Susceptibility and progression mechanisms remain explicit research questions

## What sits behind each finding

Counts describe what the report retained, not how many clinicians hold a view. A statement can support more than one finding.

| Finding | Statements | Passages | Sources | Named voices | Counterview | Limitations |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | ---: |
| F1 | 9 | 5 | 4 | 3 | recorded | 3 |
| F2 | 6 | 6 | 3 | 2 | recorded | 2 |
| F3 | 7 | 5 | 2 | 1 | none recorded | 3 |
| F4 | 10 | 10 | 6 | 5 | recorded | 2 |
| F5 | 7 | 7 | 3 | 1 | none recorded | 3 |
| F6 | 5 | 2 | 2 | 1 | none recorded | 3 |
| F7 | 9 | 8 | 1 | 4 | recorded | 3 |
| F8 | 5 | 6 | 3 | 1 | none recorded | 2 |

### What the statements are

| Finding | Views | Questions and uncertainty | Clinical experience | Comparisons | Restated results and context | Passages supporting | Passages giving context | Sources by kind | Feeds the Medical Affairs question |
| --- | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | ---: | --- | --- |
| F1 | 4 | 4 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 1 post or article, 2 podcasts and video, 1 publication | yes |
| F2 | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 1 post or article, 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F3 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 4 | 7 | 0 | 1 podcast or video, 1 registry | yes |
| F4 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 11 | 3 | 3 posts and articles, 3 podcasts and video | yes |
| F5 | 2 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 | 8 | 0 | 1 post or article, 1 podcast or video, 1 publication | yes |
| F6 | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 3 | 5 | 0 | 2 podcasts and video | yes |
| F7 | 6 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 9 | 0 | 1 post or article | yes |
| F8 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 0 | 2 | 7 | 0 | 1 podcast or video, 1 publication, 1 registry | yes |

### Trial dimensions

- Primary endpoint: Time to progression (TTP) from MGUS/SMM to overt multiple myeloma.: F1 (1 shared claims), F2 (2 shared claims), F3 (4 shared claims)
- Population and setting: F1 (1 shared claims), F4 (9 shared claims)
- The comparison: F4 (2 shared claims)
- Safety and tolerability: no finding draws on it directly

## Sample findings

Paraphrased; the full report links each statement to its source.

### F1. Support for research screening is not a blanket recommendation for routine screening

In a YouTube interview, a medical oncologist described by the source as a PROMISE principal investigator asks whether precursor screening and earlier treatment could prevent organ-damaging myeloma.

The source’s description of trial involvement is not independently verified.

Source: YouTube video, 2020-04-29.

### F8. Susceptibility and progression mechanisms remain explicit research questions

In a YouTube interview, a medical oncologist asks about inherited myeloma susceptibility, clonal evolution and immune influences on progression. The source describes the interviewee as a PROMISE principal investigator.

The source’s description of trial involvement is not independently verified.

Source: YouTube video, 2020-04-29.

## What's inside

| Section | Items | Access |
| --- | ---: | --- |
| Findings with interpretation, counterviews and limits | 8 | Titles free |
| Detailed analysis | 9 sections | Paid |
| Verified statements with short source quotes and links | 97 | Paid |
| Trial aspects mapped | 11 | Free |
| Sources with links | 13 | Counts free |
| Speaker attribution for cited voices | 7 | Paid |

## Trial aspects

10 discussed · 1 no commentary found · 0 assessment incomplete.

| Aspect | Coverage | Statements | Sources |
| --- | --- | ---: | ---: |
| Primary endpoint: Time to progression (TTP) from MGUS/SMM to overt multiple myeloma. | discussed | 7 | 3 |
| Population and setting | discussed | 11 | 6 |
| The comparison | discussed | 2 | 2 |
| Safety and tolerability | no commentary found | 0 | 0 |
| Research screening versus routine asymptomatic screening | discussed | 7 | 3 |
| From precursor detection to surveillance or selective intervention | discussed | 13 | 3 |
| Risk thresholds, longitudinal change and marrow-biopsy burden | discussed | 3 | 1 |
| Detection yield, assay sensitivity and the meaning of MGIP | discussed | 2 | 2 |
| Patient-initiated access, result communication and referral | discussed | 5 | 2 |
| Familial concern, early clones and limits of biological inference | discussed | 10 | 1 |
| Inherited, clonal, immune and environmental contributors to progression | discussed | 2 | 1 |

An aspect marked incomplete is a question the public commentary did not let us answer. We show it rather than hide it.

## Sources

| Channel | Screened | Cited |
| --- | ---: | ---: |
| X threads | 67 | 6 |
| YouTube | 3 | 3 |
| Bluesky threads | 1 | 0 |
| Publications (primary source, cited for context) | not screened | 3 |
| Registry (primary source, cited for context) | not screened | 1 |

- Screened window: 2018-08-30 to 2026-09-17
- Cited window: 2018-11-24 to 2026-05-04
- Retrieved: 2026-11-01

Screened sources were retrieved for this trial. Cited sources back at least one verified statement and include primary sources used for context.

## The trial

From ClinicalTrials.gov.

- Title: Predicting Progression of Developing Myeloma in a High-Risk Screened Population (PROMISE)
- Registry: NCT03689595 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT03689595)
- Study IDs: 18-370
- Sponsor: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute
- Design: Observational · observational, cohort, prospective
- Status: Enrolling by invitation
- Enrollment: 30,000 (estimated)
- Start: 2018-10-31 (actual)
- Primary completion: 2033-10-31 (estimated)
- Primary endpoint: Time to progression (TTP) from MGUS/SMM to overt multiple myeloma. (15 years)
- Intervention: Samples of blood (2-4 tablespoons) from 4 tubes will be collected -Analysis will be performed on the blood to test for multiple myeloma precursor conditions. (other)

## Scope and limits

This report does not judge efficacy, estimate HCP prevalence or consensus or give treatment advice.

- Discussion that does not name the trial may be missing from this edition.
- Some clinician views in the sources used in this report are not yet captured as evidence in this edition.
- Some passages in the sources used in this report were not fully assessed for clinician views, so a view there may be missing from this edition.
- 79 statements in the sources reviewed for this edition are about other patients or topics, or only mention the trial, and are not counted.
- Further source limits apply, so some matching discussion may be missing.
- The sources reviewed for this edition are not a representative sample of HCP opinion. Searches emphasized PROMISE and its identifiers, and 849 potentially relevant sources that did not name the trial were not read; indirect discussion may therefore be missing.
- Several available passages were not fully evaluated. A further passage had unclear disease-population wording and could not support a reliable conclusion. The report cannot establish that all consequential views or objections have been captured.
- The HealthTree video passages are unattributed. They cannot be assigned to a named clinician or counted as additional independently identified endorsements.
- Some speakers' identities or clinical roles are not established in the sources used in this report; each statement is attributed only as far as its source shows.
- A speaker’s PROMISE role and another speaker’s Dana-Farber association are descriptions made by the sources. Their views should not be treated as independent external endorsements or evidence of consensus.
- Eligibility, screening counts, follow-up procedures and assay availability are described at different times. The sources do not establish current eligibility, reconcile recruitment figures or demonstrate present-day access across healthcare settings.
- No standalone protocol was available. The free-light-chain publication was accessible only as an abstract, limiting assessment of its full methods and qualifications.
- Prevalence findings, biobank clinical associations, progression hypotheses and hoped-for prevention benefits are different forms of evidence. The statements reviewed do not demonstrate a mortality, organ-damage prevention or cure benefit from PROMISE screening.

How reports are built and checked: https://www.erudio.com/methods

## Editions and corrections

- v1.0.0, accepted 2026-11-02: current edition

Last checked for new commentary 2026-11-02. No corrections. Versions follow semver: a new or changed finding is a minor version, more evidence without a material change is a patch.

## Offer

- Size: Focused (97 verified statements)
- Current edition: $750. A purchase starts a check for new commentary and any newer edition follows at no charge
- 3 months of weekly updates: $1,300
- 6 months of weekly updates: $1,900
- 12 months of weekly updates: $2,600
- Optional identity linkages (12-month updates only, product updates-12-identities; speakers are named and described in every report): NPI and other verified IDs at $15 per identity-verified person in the edition at purchase (6 now), at most $750; people verified later in the term at no charge
- Pricing: https://www.erudio.com/pricing
- Buy now (card, through Stripe): https://www.erudio.com/reports/promise-nct03689595
- Agents: POST https://www.erudio.com/api/orders with {"report": "promise-nct03689595", "product": "edition" | "updates-3" | "updates-6" | "updates-12" | "updates-12-identities", "buyer_email": "...", "licence_key": "<your key, if you hold one>"}; it returns a payment link for your user (and a pay_url your own MPP or x402 payment client can pay over HTTP 402, when offered), and once paid the status_url returns your license key. Send the same key with every later order so all reports sit on one key. The buyer gets their account key by email, which reads every report bought with their address; recover_key (POST https://www.erudio.com/api/keys/recover) sends it again
- Talk to Audun Utengen and Tom Lee (invoice, PO, questions): https://www.erudio.com/contact?report=promise-03689595

## Cite

Erudio Health. PROMISE (NCT03689595): HCP commentary report. Edition 1, v1.0.0. Accepted Nov 2, 2026. https://www.erudio.com/reports/promise-nct03689595

## Machine access

- JSON: https://www.erudio.com/reports/promise-nct03689595.json
- Markdown: https://www.erudio.com/reports/promise-nct03689595.md
- MCP, no sign-in: https://mcp.erudio.com/free, tool `get_report_card` with `{"slug": "promise-03689595"}`