Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21409520›Full record

ArticleGastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association2011

Biweekly cetuximab and irinotecan as second-line therapy in patients with gastro-esophageal cancer previously treated with platinum.

Katrine R Schoennemann, Jon K Bjerregaard, Tine P Hansen, Karin De Stricker, Morten F Gjerstorff, Helle A Jensen, Lene W Vestermark, Per Pfeiffer

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Targeted therapies for advanced and metastatic adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction: is there something new?Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2017
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Changing strategies for target therapy in gastric cancer.World journal of gastroenterology · 2016
    Review
  6. Article
  7. Novel targeted agents for gastric cancer.Journal of hematology & oncology · 2012
    Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Katrine R SchoennemannDepartment of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Sdr. Boulevard 29, 5000, Odense C, Denmark. k.schoennemann@ouh.regionsyddanmark.dk.
Jon K Bjerregaard
Tine P Hansen
Karin De Stricker
Morten F Gjerstorff
Helle A Jensen
Lene W Vestermark
Per Pfeiffer
Odense University Hospital · DKUniversity of Southern Denmark · DKHerlev Hospital · DK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUntil recently there has been no proven second-line therapy for patients with advanced gastro-esophageal cancer (GEC). Since 2004, Denmark has had a national health program where non-proven therapy can be offered to patients with advanced cancer, after approval by an expert panel appointed by the National Board of Health. This program has accelerated the introduction and implementation of new therapies in Denmark. Inspired by therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer, a combination of cetuximab and irinotecan (Cetiri) was chosen for second-line therapy in GEC patients. We report our experience with Cetiri as second-line therapy in patients with GEC.

methodsAll patients had histologically confirmed GEC and all patients had progressive disease during or after first-line platinum-containing chemotherapy. The patients received cetuximab 500 mg/m(2) on day 1 and irinotecan 180 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 2nd week until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Toxicity was prospectively evaluated according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) version 3.0.

resultsFrom December 2007 to February 2009, 50 consecutive patients received Cetiri as second-line therapy. Median performance status (PS) was 1. The median number of courses was seven. Seven patients (14%) had a partial response. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 months and overall survival (OS) was 5.5 months; two patients are still alive without progressive disease. Major toxicities were: diarrhea (8%), fatigue (10%), neutropenia (16%), and febrile neutropenia (2%).

conclusionCetiri every two weeks is a convenient and well-tolerated second-line regimen in GEC patients. A promising effect was seen in patients with PS 0-1 and in patients who developed a rash.

Indexed as

Salvage TherapyAdultAgedAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCamptothecinCetuximabEsophageal NeoplasmsFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansIrinotecanMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisAntibodies, MonoclonalAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedCamptothecinCetuximabIrinotecanOrganoplatinum Compounds

Identifiers

PMID21409520
OpenAlexW2085527412

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.