Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26374340›Full record

ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2015

First-Line Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Interpreting FIRE-3, PEAK, and CALGB/SWOG 80405.

Elena Elez, Guillem Argilés, Josep Tabernero

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 48 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
48citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 4% 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

48 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Clinical Benefit of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring in Colorectal Cancer Patients Who Received Fluorouracil-Based Chemotherapy.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2021
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Observational
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Elena ElezVall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, P. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, Barcelona, 08035, Spain. meelez@vhio.net.
Guillem ArgilésVall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, P. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
Josep TaberneroVall d'Hebron Institute of Oncology, P. Vall d'Hebron 119-129, Barcelona, 08035, Spain.
Vall d'Hebron Institute of OncologyVall d'Hebron Institut de Recerca · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The advances made in the therapeutic management of colorectal cancer (CRC) over recent years with the addition of therapies targeting angiogenesis or cell proliferation have positioned bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab as accepted first-line treatments when combined with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI for RAS wild-type (WT) metastatic CRC. The question has been raised as to the choice of targeted therapy to maximize chances of an optimal outcome. Three studies, the phase III FIRE-3 (AIO KRK-0306), the phase II PEAK, and the recently presented phase III CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial, have addressed this issue face-on, directly comparing the addition of bevacizumab versus cetuximab or panitumumab to FOLFOX/FOLFIRI in terms of efficacy outcomes. None of these studies met their primary endpoint (response rate, progression-free survival or overall survival respectively), meaning we are no closer to being able to categorically define an optimal targeted treatment in the first-line setting for patients with advanced CRC. This led to reflection over study design and further analyses, raising a number of important issues. High-sensitivity analysis of the mutational status of exons identified a population with a "pure" non-RAS-mutated profile showing benefit with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) combinations, particularly in the context of early and greater depth of response. Coherent with a personalized therapeutic approach, the importance of performing individual high-sensitivity extended RAS testing is unequivocal and is currently a requirement in many countries to identify this all-RAS WT population, thus limiting unnecessary exposure and expense in patients unlikely to respond. These three studies, particularly the CALGB/SWOG 80405 trial, mark an important milestone in the roadmap of metastatic CRC treatment, highlighting the need for close analysis to fully exploit the available data.

Indexed as

Molecular Targeted TherapyPrecision MedicineAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsColorectal NeoplasmsErbB ReceptorsHumansMutationVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic AgentsErbB ReceptorsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor ABevacizumabCetuximabColorectal cancerPanitumumab

Identifiers

PMID26374340
OpenAlexW2203602330

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.