ReviewDrugs2015
Prognostic and Predictive Value of RAS Gene Mutations in Colorectal Cancer: Moving Beyond KRAS Exon 2.
Review in Drugs, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Mutation profiling of cancer drivers in Brazilian colorectal cancer.Scientific reports · 2019Article
- Molecular subtyping of colorectal cancer: Recent progress, new challenges and emerging opportunities.Seminars in cancer biology · 2019Review
- Important molecular genetic markers of colorectal cancer.Oncotarget · 2016Review
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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The advent of anti-EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) therapy resulted in significant progress in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer patients. However, many patients do not respond to this therapy or develop acquired resistance within a few months after the start of treatment. Since 2008, anti-EGFR therapy is restricted to KRAS wild-type patients as it has been shown that KRAS exon 2-mutated patients do not respond to this therapy. Still, up to 60 % of KRAS exon 2 wild-type patients show primary resistance to this treatment. Recently, several studies investigating the predictive and prognostic role of RAS mutations other than in KRAS exon 2 demonstrated that patients with these mutations are not responding to therapy. However, the role of these mutations has long been questioned as The National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines in Oncology and the European Medicines Agency indications had already been changed in order to restrict anti-EGFR therapy to all RAS wild-type colorectal cancer patients, while the Food and Drug Administration guidelines remained unchanged. Recently, the Food and Drug Administration guidelines have also been changed, which implies the importance of RAS mutations beyond KRAS exon 2 in colorectal cancer. In this review, we discuss the most important studies regarding the predictive and prognostic role of RAS mutations other than in KRAS exon 2 in order to demonstrate the importance of these RAS mutations in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with anti-EGFR therapy.
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.