Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26770486›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical and experimental medicine2015

Efficacy of FOLFOXIRI versus XELOXIRI plus bevacizumab in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Yuzhuo Cheng, Weiliang Song

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical and experimental medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 32% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Yuzhuo ChengDepartment of Surgery, Tianjin Third Central Hospital Tianjin City, China.
Weiliang SongDepartment of Surgery, Tianjin Third Central Hospital Tianjin City, China.
Tianjin Third Central Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundChemotherapy with capecitabine combined with leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (XELOXIRI-Bev) or fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan plus bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI-Bev), is recently introduced as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The comparison between the two strategies above in clinical efficacy has not been assessed.

methodsWe retrospectively reviewed 138 patients with untreated metastatic colorectal cancer to receive either FOLFOXIR-Bev (group 1) or XELOXIRI-Bev (group 2). Up to 12 cycles of treatment were administered, followed by fluorouracil plus bevacizumab until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival.

resultsThe mean progression-free survival was 13.5 months in the group 1, as compared with 10.4 months in the group 2 (hazard ratio for progression, 0.3; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.12 to 0.83; P = 0.032). The objective response rate was 71% in the group 1 and 52.2% in the group 2 (P = 0.006). Overall survival was not found significant difference between the two groups (group 1 vs. 2; 31.3 vs. 24.6 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.29 to 1.15; P = 0.115). The incidences of grade 3 or 4 neurotoxicity, stomatitis, diarrhea, and neutropenia were significantly higher in the group 1.

conclusionFOLFOXIR-Bev, as compared with XELOXIRI-Bev, improved the outcomes in patients with mCRC, but increased the incidence of some adverse events.

Indexed as

FOLFOXIRI-Bevmetastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC)outcomesXELOXIRI-Bev

Identifiers

PMID26770486
PMCPMC4694386
OpenAlexW2415676605

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.