ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2016
Benefit of Bevacizumab-Based Frontline Therapy in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC): a Turkish Oncology Group Study.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis 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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSeveral chemotherapy regimens using bevacizumab have been developed. Our goal was to investigate regimens that have demonstrated significant clinical activity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). MATERIALS AND
methodsSix hundred and sixty six patients with mCRC who received first-line chemotherapy combination with bevacizumab were studied. Fluoropyrimidine (F) plus irinotecan (I)-based (FI-bev), F plus oxaliplatin (O)-based (FO-bev), and F-based (F-bev) treatment regimens were compared with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
resultsThe median PFS of FI-bev (n = 414) was 10.9 months (95 % CI 10-11.8), of FO-bev (n = 211) was 9.4 months (95 % CI 8.3-10.4), and of F-bev (n = 41) was 9.5 months (95 % CI 5.9-13.1) (p = 0.089). The median OS of FI-bev was 26.3 months (95 % CI 21.7-30.9), of FO-bev was 27 months (95 % CI 24.3-29.7), and of F-bev was 23.3 months (95 % CI 12.7-33.9) (p = 0.102). In KRAS wild-type patients, the median PFS of FI-bev group was significantly longer than FO-bev group (10.5 vs. 9.1 months, p = 0.006). The FI-bev group had better OS than FO-bev group with borderline significance (p = 0.058). The FI-bev group had significantly longer OS than F-bev group. Patients who underwent metastasectomy or those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG-PS) ≤1 had longer PFS and OS independent of the type of chemotherapy regimen.
conclusionFI-bev may be the preferred frontline regimen for patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC. Metastasectomy and performance score were the strongest positive predictors of OS and PFS regardless of backbone chemotherapy regimen.
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.