Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26121270›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

High BRAF Mutation Frequency and Marked Survival Differences in Subgroups According to KRAS/BRAF Mutation Status and Tumor Tissue Availability in a Prospective Population-Based Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Cohort.

Halfdan Sorbye, Anca Dragomir, Magnus Sundström, Per Pfeiffer, Ulf Thunberg, Monica Bergfors, Kristine Aasebø, Geir Egil Eide, Fredrik Ponten, Camilla Qvortrup and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 53 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
53citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

53 citing papers in PubMed, 114 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. ANCHOR CRC: Results From a Single-Arm, Phase II Study of Encorafenib Plus Binimetinib and Cetuximab in Previously UntreatedJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2023
    Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Encorafenib Plus Cetuximab as a New Standard of Care for Previously TreatedJournal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2021
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Safety and efficacy of encorafenib-cetuximab combination inESMO real world data and digital oncology · 2024
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. [Progress of BRAF Gene Alteration in Non-small Cell Lung Cancer].Zhongguo fei ai za zhi = Chinese journal of lung cancer · 2024
    Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Observational
  20. BRAFAdvances in therapy · 2023
    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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

Halfdan SorbyeDepartment of Oncology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Anca DragomirDepartment of Pathology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden; Department of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Magnus SundströmDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Per PfeifferDepartment of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Ulf ThunbergDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Monica BergforsDepartment of Pathology, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Kristine AasebøDepartment of Oncology, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Geir Egil EideDepartment of Global Public Health and Primary Care, Lifestyle Epidemiology Group, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway.
Fredrik PontenScience for Life Laboratory, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Camilla QvortrupDepartment of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark.
Bengt GlimeliusDepartment of Immunology, Genetics and Pathology, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Uppsala University · SEHaukeland University Hospital · NOOdense University Hospital · DKUppsala University Hospital · SEScience for Life Laboratory · SEUniversity of Bergen · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

RAS and BRAF mutations impact treatment and prognosis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients (mCRC), but the knowledge is based on trial patients usually not representative for the general cancer population. Patient characteristics, treatment and efficacy according to KRAS, BRAF and MSI status were analyzed in a prospectively collected unselected population-based cohort of 798 non-resectable mCRC patients. The cohort contained many patients with poor performance status (39% PS 2-4) and elderly (37% age>75), groups usually not included in clinical trials. Patients without available tissue micro array (TMA) (42%) had worse prognostic factors and inferior survival (all patients; 7m vs 11m, chemotherapy-treated;12m vs 17m). The 92 patients (21%) with BRAF mutation had a poor prognosis regardless of microsatellite instability, but receipt of 1-2nd chemotherapy was similar to wildtype BRAF patients. Median survival in this cohort varied from 1 month in BRAF mutated patients not given chemotherapy to 26 months in wildtype KRAS/BRAF patients <75 years in good PS. TMA availability, BRAF mutation and KRAS mutation were all independent prognostic factors for survival. The observed 21% BRAF mutation incidence is higher than the previously and repeatedly reported incidence of 5-12% in mCRC. Screening for BRAF mutations before selection of treatment is relevant for many patients, especially outside clinical trials. A BRAF mutation only partly explained the very poor prognosis of many mCRC patients. Survival in unselected metastatic colorectal cancer patients is extremely variable and subgroups have an extremely short survival compared to trial patients. Patients without available TMA had worse prognostic factors and shorter survival, which questions the total generalizability of present TMA studies and implies that we lack information on the biologically worst mCRC cases. Lack of available tissue is an important underexposed issue which introduces sample bias, and this should be recognized more clearly when conclusions are made from translational mCRC studies.

Indexed as

Mutation RateAgedColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleHumansMaleMicrosatellite InstabilityMiddle AgedMultivariate AnalysisMutationNeoplasm MetastasisProspective StudiesProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Survival AnalysisTissue Array AnalysisKRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)

Identifiers

PMID26121270
PMCPMC4484806
OpenAlexW1481372545

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.