ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2016
Molecular testing to optimize therapeutic decision making in advanced colorectal cancer.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2016. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular biomarkers and precision medicine in colorectal cancer: a systematic review of health economic analyses.Oncotarget · 2019Review
- MAPK inhibitors induce serine peptidase inhibitor Kazal type 1 (SPINK1) secretion in BRAF V600E-mutant colorectal adenocarcinoma.Molecular oncology · 2018Article
- Making sense of big data in health research: Towards an EU action plan.Genome medicine · 2016Article
- A bispecific nanobody approach to leverage the potent and widely applicable tumor cytolytic capacity of Vγ9Vδ2-T cells.OncoimmunologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a leading cause of cancer death in the United States. In recent years, therapeutic advances have prolonged the survival of patients with advanced disease. Along with the addition of new treatments, an increasing body of literature explores the potential benefit of using molecular testing to define tumor, circulating, or host biomarkers of benefit to specific treatment strategies. At present, testing for specific mutations in exons 2, 3, and 4 of KRAS and NRAS has become accepted practice to select patients for treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-targeted agents. Additionally, testing for the BRAF V600E mutation is used to refine decisions based on patient prognosis. The presence of the uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1) *28 polymorphism is associated with toxicity from irinotecan, although it has not been universally applied. Nonetheless, molecular markers to predict response and toxicity of cytotoxic therapy are evolving. While the development of selection biomarkers for anti-angiogenic treatments has not proved fruitful to date, improved development strategies and novel targeted agents are anticipated to revolutionize the approach to treatment of advanced CRC in the near future. This review summarizes currently available data to select treatment strategies in patients with advanced CRC.
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.