ArticleRadiology and oncology2016
Bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in elderly patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer: single center experience.
Article in Radiology and oncology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Review
- Clinical analysis of bevacizumab targeting therapy in treating early colorectal carcinoma after operation.Oncology letters · 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMetastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is mainly a disease of elderly, however, geriatric population is underrepresented in clinical trials. Patient registries represent a tool to assess and follow treatment outcomes in this patient population. The aim of the study was with the help of the patients' register to determine the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab plus chemotherapy in elderly patients who had previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe registry of patients with mCRC was designed to prospectively evaluate the safety and efficacy of bevacizumab-containing chemotherapy as well as selection of patients in routine clinical practice. Patient baseline clinical characteristics, pre-specified bevacizumab-related adverse events, and efficacy data were collected, evaluated and compared according to the age categories.
resultsBetween January 2008 and December 2010, 210 patients with mCRC (median age 63, male 61.4%) started bevacizumab-containing therapy in the 1(st) line setting. Majority of the 210 patients received irinotecan-based chemotherapy (68%) as 1(st) line treatment and 105 patients (50%) received bevacizumab maintenance therapy. Elderly (≥ 70 years) patients presented 22.9% of all patients and they had worse performance status (PS 1/2, 62.4%) than patients in < 70 years group (PS 1/2, 35.8%). Difference in disease control rate was mainly due to inability to assess response in elderly group (64.6% in elderly and 77.8% in < 70 years group, p = 0.066). The median progression free survival was 10.2 (95% CI, 6.7-16.2) and 11.3 (95% CI, 10.2-12.6) months in elderly and < 70 years group, respectively (p = 0.58). The median overall survival was 18.5 (95% CI, 12.4-28.9) and 27.4 (95% CI, 22.7-31.9) months for elderly and < 70 years group, respectively (p = 0.03). Three-year survival rate was 26% and 37.6% in elderly vs. < 70 years group (p = 0.03). Overall rates of bevacizumab-related adverse events were similar in both groups: proteinuria 21/22 %, hypertension 25/19 %, haemorrhage 2/4 % and thromboembolic events 10/6 %, for elderly and < 70 years group, respectively.
conclusionsIn routine clinical practice, the combination of bevacizumab and chemotherapy is effective and well-tolerated regimen in elderly patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
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.