ArticleCancer medicine2014
Does the type of first-line regimens influence the receipt of second-line chemotherapy treatment? An analysis of 3211 metastatic colon cancer patients.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 2 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Treatment of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and poor performance status: current evidence and challenges.Clinics (Sao Paulo, Brazil) · 2018Pooled it
- Sequential Therapies and the Cost-Effectiveness of Treating Metastatic Colon Cancer Patients.Journal of managed care & specialty pharmacy · 2016Article
- Cost-effectiveness of second-line chemotherapy/biologics among elderly metastatic colon cancer patients.Advances in therapy · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
With new agents entering the market, the sequencing of first-line (Tx1), second-line (Tx2), and subsequent chemotherapy/biologics regimens are being examined. We examined how Tx1 regimens impacted the likelihood of receiving Tx2 among metastatic colon cancer (mCC) patients. Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER)-Medicare data were used to identify elderly mCC patients between 2003 and 2007. The inverse probability weighting Cox regression method was utilized to study the relationship between receipt of Tx2 and Tx1 regimens, controlling for patient-level factors. Of the 7895 elderly patients identified, 3211 (41%) received Tx1 of which 1440 proceeded to Tx2. The impact of Tx1 on receipt of Tx2 varied by the specific regimens utilized. As compared to 5FU/LV users, IROX (Hazard Ratio [HR] = 0.03; P < 0.01) and IROX + Biologics (HR = 0.20; P < 0.01) users were less likely to receive Tx2; (oxaliplatin) OX + Biologics (HR = 1.26; P < 0.01) users were more likely to receive Tx2. Significant patient-level factors included: Hispanic ethnicity (HR = 0.67; P < 0.01); being married (HR = 0.87; P = 0.01); proxy for poor performance status (HR = 0.82; P = 0.05); each 10-year age increment (HR = 1.14; P < 0.01); and State buy-in status (HR = 1.21; P = 0.01). The specific first-line regimen does impact mCC patients' likelihood of receiving Tx2 in clinical practice. Elderly mCC patients, their health care providers, and policy makers will benefit from new evidence about the impact of sequencing of treatment lines.
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.