GuidelineClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2015
Updated guidelines for biomarker testing in colorectal carcinoma: a national consensus of the Spanish Society of Pathology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology.
Guideline in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Update of the recommendations for the determination of biomarkers in colorectal carcinoma: National Consensus of the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology and the Spanish Society of Pathology.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020Article
- Identification of Prognostic Biomarkers and Drugs Targeting Them in Colon Adenocarcinoma: A Bioinformatic Analysis.Integrative cancer therapiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Publication of this consensus statement is a joint initiative of the Spanish Society of Pathology (SEAP) and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM), intended to revise and update the diagnostic and treatment recommendations published 2 years ago on biomarker use and the management of patients with colorectal carcinoma (CRC), thereby providing an opportunity to improve healthcare efficiency and resource use in these patients. This expert group recommends testing for KRAS and NRAS status in all patients with metastatic CRC being considered for anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapy, as this type of treatment should only be used in patients not harbouring mutations in these genes. In contrast, testing for BRAF, EGFR, PI3K and PTEN mutation status is not necessary for therapeutic decision making, so does not need to be done routinely.
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.