Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25861256›Full record

ArticleGastroenterology research and practice2015

Does the Addition of Cetuximab to Radiochemotherapy Improve Outcome of Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer? Long-Term Results from Phase II Trials.

M Kripp, K Horisberger, S Mai, P Kienle, T Gaiser, S Post, F Wenz, K Merx, R-D Hofheinz

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Gastroenterology research and practice, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.9field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Rectal Cancer, Version 2.2018, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network : JNCCN · 2018
    Guideline
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. 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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

M KrippIII. Medizinische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
K HorisbergerChirurgische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
S MaiKlinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
P KienleChirurgische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
T GaiserPathologisches Institut, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
S PostChirurgische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
F WenzKlinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
K MerxIII. Medizinische Klinik, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
R-D HofheinzInterdisziplinäres Tumorzentrum, Universitätsmedizin Mannheim, Universität Heidelberg, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167 Mannheim, Germany.
University Hospital Heidelberg · DEHeidelberg University · DEUniversity Medical Centre Mannheim · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose. The addition of cetuximab to radiochemotherapy (RCT) failed to improve complete response rates in locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC). We report the long-term results in patients treated within two sequential clinical trials. Methods. Patients receiving neoadjuvant RCT using capecitabine and irinotecan (CapIri) within a phase I/II trial or CapIri + cetuximab within a phase II trial were evaluated for analysis of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). KRAS exon 2 mutational status had been analyzed in patients receiving cetuximab. Results. 37 patients from the CapIri trial and 49 patients from the CapIri-cetuximab treatment group were evaluable. Median follow-up time was 75.2 months. The 5-year DFS rate was 82% (CapIri) and 79% (CapIri-cetuximab) (P = 0.62). The median OS was 127.4 months. 5-year OS was 73% for both groups (CapIri and CapIri-cetuximab) (P = 0.61). No significant difference in DFS (P = 0.86) or OS (P = 0.39) was noticed between patients receiving CapIri and those receiving CapIri-cetuximab with KRAS wild-type tumors. Conclusions. As the addition of cetuximab did not improve neither DFS nor OS it should not play a role in the perioperative treatment of patients with LARC, not even of patients with (K)RAS WT tumors.

Identifiers

PMID25861256
PMCPMC4377474
OpenAlexW2025082095

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.