ReviewEcancermedicalscience2015
Effectiveness and safety of monoclonal antibodies for metastatic colorectal cancer treatment: systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Ecancermedicalscience, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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
10 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Transarterial (chemo)embolisation versus systemic chemotherapy for colorectal cancer liver metastases.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Monoclonal Antibodies (Bevacizumab, Cetuximab, and Panitumumab) in Combination with Chemotherapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BioDrugs : clinical immunotherapeutics, biopharmaceuticals and gene therapy · 2018Pooled it
- Natural Monoterpene Stylosin Induced Anticancer Effects on Human Colon Carcinoma Cells.Pharmacology research & perspectives · 2026Article
- Colorectal Cancer: From Pathophysiology to Novel Therapeutic Approaches.Biomedicines · 2021Article
- Recent Advances in Monoclonal Antibody Therapy for Colorectal Cancers.Biomedicines · 2021Review
- European Patent in Immunoncology: From Immunological Principles of Implantation to Cancer Treatment.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
- Targeting Receptor Kinases in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2019Review
- Recent advances in targeted therapy of colorectal cancer: impacts of monoclonal antibodies nanoconjugates.BioImpacts : BI · 2019Article
- Antitumor effects of oncolytic herpes simplex virus type 2 against colorectal cancer in vitro and in vivo.Therapeutics and clinical risk management · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe effectiveness of chemotherapy (CT) for select cases of metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) has been well established in the literature, however, it provides limited benefits and in many cases constitutes a treatment with high toxicity. The use of specific molecular biological treatments with monoclonal antibodies (MA) has been shown to be relevant, particularly for its potential for increasing the response rate of the host to the tumour, as these have molecular targets present in the cancerous cells and their microenvironment thereby blocking their development. The combination of MA and CT can bring a significant increase in the rate of resectability of metastases, the progression-free survival (PFS), and the global survival (GS) in MCRC patients.
objectiveTo assess the effectiveness and safety of MA in the treatment of MCRC.
methodsA systematic review was carried out with a meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials comparing the use of cetuximab, bevacizumab, and panitumumab in the treatment of MCRC.
resultsSixteen randomised clinical trials were selected. The quality of the evidence on the question was considered moderate and data from eight randomised clinical trials were included in this meta-analysis. The GS and PFS were greater in the groups which received the MA associated with CT, however, the differences were not statistically significant between the groups (mean of 17.7 months versus 17.1 months; mean difference of 1.09 (CI: 0.10-2.07); p = 0.84; and 7.4 versus 6.9 months. mean difference of 0.76 (CI: 0.08-1.44); p = 0.14 respectively). The meta-analysis was not done for any of the secondary outcomes.
conclusionThe addition of MA to CT for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer does not prolong GS and PFS.
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.