Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2011
Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial.
Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00182715 (A Three-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Either Continuous Chemotherapy Plus Cetuximab or Intermittent Chemotherapy With Standard Continuous Palliative Combination Chemotherapy With Oxaliplatin and a Fluoropyrimidine in First Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 97 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
A Three-Arm Randomised Controlled Trial Comparing Either Continuous Chemotherapy Plus Cetuximab or Intermittent Chemotherapy With Standard Continuous Palliative Combination Chemotherapy With Oxaliplatin and a Fluoropyrimidine in First Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (COIN)
Who cites it
97 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 262 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Role of Maintenance Strategies in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.JAMA oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Assessing the Justification, Funding, Success, and Survival Outcomes of Randomized Noninferiority Trials of Cancer Drugs: A Systematic Review and Pooled Analysis.JAMA network open · 2019Pooled it
- Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors for metastatic colorectal cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Survival Benefit and Safety of Bevacizumab in Combination with Erlotinib as Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-Analysis.Clinical drug investigation · 2017Pooled it
- Is monitoring of plasma 5-fluorouracil levels in metastatic / advanced colorectal cancer clinically effective? A systematic review.BMC cancer · 2016Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Primary tumor sidedness and negative hyperselection to modulate anti-EGFR-based maintenance strategies in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: individual patient data pooled analysis of two randomized clinical trials.British journal of cancer · 2025Trial
- Temporary treatment cessation compared with continuation of tyrosine kinase inhibitors for adults with renal cancer: the STAR non-inferiority RCT.Health technology assessment (Winchester, England) · 2024Trial
- Panitumumab Plus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Versus Fluorouracil and Folinic Acid Alone as Maintenance Therapy inJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2022Trial
- Multicenter phase II clinical study of the efficiency and safety of capecitabine plus intermittent oxaliplatin with bevacizumab as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (VOICE trial).International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Trial
- Capecitabine Versus Active Monitoring in Stable or Responding Metastatic Colorectal Cancer After 16 Weeks of First-Line Therapy: Results of the Randomized FOCUS4-N Trial.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021Trial
- Effect of Reduced-Dose Capecitabine Plus Cetuximab as Maintenance Therapy for RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Phase 2 Clinical Trial.JAMA network open · 2020Trial
- Prognostic factors in patients treated with second-line chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: results from the randomized prospective phase III FFCD-0307 trial.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2019Trial
- Inhibition of EGFR, HER2, and HER3 signalling in patients with colorectal cancer wild-type for BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS, and NRAS (FOCUS4-D): a phase 2-3 randomised trial.The lancet. Gastroenterology & hepatology · 2018Trial
- Clinicopathological factors influencing outcome in metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidine and bevacizumab maintenance treatment vs observation: an individual patient data meta-analysis of two phase 3 trials.British journal of cancer · 2017Trial
- Dual Inhibition of EGFR and c-Src by Cetuximab and Dasatinib Combined with FOLFOX Chemotherapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2017Trial
- TRIBE-2: a phase III, randomized, open-label, strategy trial in unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer patients by the GONO group.BMC cancer · 2017Trial
- Trial
- Derived neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio as a prognostic factor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer according to RAS and BRAF status: a post-hoc analysis of the MRC COIN study.Anti-cancer drugs · 2017Trial
- Trial
37 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
21 authors at 14 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundWhen cure is impossible, cancer treatment should focus on both length and quality of life. Maximisation of time without toxic effects could be one effective strategy to achieve both of these goals. The COIN trial assessed preplanned treatment holidays in advanced colorectal cancer to achieve this aim.
methodsCOIN was a randomised controlled trial in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Patients received either continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination (arm A), continuous chemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent (arm C) chemotherapy. In arms A and B, treatment continued until development of progressive disease, cumulative toxic effects, or the patient chose to stop. In arm C, patients who had not progressed at their 12-week scan started a chemotherapy-free interval until evidence of disease progression, when the same treatment was restarted. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and B is described in a companion paper. Here, we compare arms A and C, with the primary objective of establishing whether overall survival on intermittent therapy was non-inferior to that on continuous therapy, with a predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1.162. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448.
findings1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to continuous and 815 to intermittent therapy). Median survival in the ITT population (n=815 in both groups) was 15.8 months (IQR 9.4-26.1) in arm A and 14.4 months (8.0-24.7) in arm C (hazard ratio [HR] 1.084, 80% CI 1.008-1.165). In the per-protocol population (arm A, n=467; arm C, n=511), median survival was 19.6 months (13.0-28.1) in arm A and 18.0 months (12.1-29.3) in arm C (HR 1.087, 0.986-1.198). The upper limits of CIs for HRs in both analyses were greater than the predefined non-inferiority boundary. Preplanned subgroup analyses in the per-protocol population showed that a raised baseline platelet count, defined as 400,000 per μL or higher (271 [28%] of 978 patients), was associated with poor survival with intermittent chemotherapy: the HR for comparison of arm C and arm A in patients with a normal platelet count was 0.96 (95% CI 0.80-1.15, p=0.66), versus 1.54 (1.17-2.03, p=0.0018) in patients with a raised platelet count (p=0.0027 for interaction). In the per-protocol population, more patients on continuous than on intermittent treatment had grade 3 or worse haematological toxic effects (72 [15%] vs 60 [12%]), whereas nausea and vomiting were more common on intermittent treatment (11 [2%] vs 43 [8%]). Grade 3 or worse peripheral neuropathy (126 [27%] vs 25 [5%]) and hand-foot syndrome (21 [4%] vs 15 [3%]) were more frequent on continuous than on intermittent treatment.
interpretationAlthough this trial did not show non-inferiority of intermittent compared with continuous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in terms of overall survival, chemotherapy-free intervals remain a treatment option for some patients with advanced colorectal cancer, offering reduced time on chemotherapy, reduced cumulative toxic effects, and improved quality of life. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with normal baseline platelet counts could gain the benefits of intermittent chemotherapy without detriment in survival, whereas those with raised baseline platelet counts have impaired survival and quality of life with intermittent chemotherapy and should not receive a treatment break.
fundingCancer Research UK.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.