ArticleCancer management and research2015
Prospective noninterventional study on the use of panitumumab monotherapy in patients with recurrent or progressive colorectal cancer: the VECTIS study.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prospective Observational Cohort Study to Describe the Use of Panitumumab in Combination with Chemotherapy in Real-World Clinical Practice for Patients with Wild-Type RAS mCRC.Advances in therapy · 2019Observational
- First-Line Cetuximab Monotherapy in KRAS/NRAS/BRAF Mutation-Negative Colorectal Cancer Patients.Clinical drug investigation · 2018Article
- Radioembolization treatment for liver metastases.Contemporary oncology (Poznan, Poland) · 2017Review
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeEpidermal growth factor receptor-targeted monoclonal antibodies are active as monotherapy beyond second-line treatment. Skin toxicities (STs) are common during treatment, and a positive association between ST severity and patient outcome has been reported. This study collected information on panitumumab monotherapy use in patients with KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer in clinical practice.
methodsThis open-label, prospective, observational, noninterventional study included adult patients who had failed prior chemotherapy with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan. Patients received panitumumab monotherapy (6 mg/kg every 2 weeks) for ≤18 cycles. Effectiveness was assessed as disease control rate (DCR), tumor response, and freedom from progression. The incidence of ST and other adverse drug reactions (ADRs) was recorded, as were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) and quality of life. The KRAS analysis process was also evaluated.
findingsThe full analysis set included 632 patients (64.6% male; mean age, 62.3 years), who completed a mean of 9.6 panitumumab cycles. ST, mainly grade 1/2, occurred in 84.3% of patients, 82.7% of whom required treatment. Nonskin ADRs occurred in 3.5% of patients. By the end of treatment, the DCR was 58.9% overall, and was 53.8% and 62.7%, respectively in patients with ST grade 0/1 and grade 2/3. Significant associations were observed between maximum ST grade and best response (P=0.0009), DCR (P=0.0046), tumor response (P=0.0002), and freedom from progression (P=0.0084). At the end of the study, 67.4% of the patients had an ECOG PS of 0/1. Quality of life was rated as "very good" or "good" in 70.3% of patients. Mean time to obtain KRAS results was 18.2 days; satisfaction with different aspects of KRAS testing was "very good" or "good" in 80%-97% of patients.
conclusionPanitumumab monotherapy showed adequate effectiveness and safety in patients with heavily pretreated KRAS exon 2 wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer. The most common ADR was grade 1/2 ST.
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.