Trial reportBMJ open2016
Protocol of a randomised phase III clinical trial of sequential capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus bevacizumab (Cape/5-FU-Bmab) to capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab (CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab) versus combination CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab in advanced colorectal cancer: the C-cubed (C3) study.
Trial report in BMJ open, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Sequential versus upfront oxaliplatin-based therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: long-term outcomes of a randomized phase 3 trial.Communications medicine · 2026Article
- Rosmarinic Acid Potentiates Cytotoxicity of Cisplatin against Colorectal Cancer Cells by Enhancing Apoptotic and Ferroptosis.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Article
- Insights into the historical trajectory and research trends of immune checkpoint blockade in colorectal cancer: visualization and bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- The Number of Intraoperative Intestinal Venous Circulating Tumor Cells Is a Prognostic Factor for Colorectal Cancer Patients.Evidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2022Article
- 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
12 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionResults from several randomised trials suggest that the sequential use of cytotoxic agents in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has the potential to improve overall survival compared with combination chemotherapy. This study is designed to investigate whether sequential treatment with bevacizumab-based first-line treatment with oxaliplatin is superior to combination treatment of mCRC. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The C-cubed (C(3)) study is a two-arm, multicentre, open-label, randomised phase III trial in Japan comparing the efficacy and safety of sequential capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus bevacizumab (Cape/5-FU-Bmab) with escalation to capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil plus oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab (CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab) versus combination CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab as the first-line treatment of mCRC. In the sequential arm (Arm A: oxaliplatin 'wait-and-go'), treatment escalation from Cape/5-FU-Bmab to CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab is recommended in the case of progressive disease. In the combination arm (Arm B: oxaliplatin 'stop-and-go'), de-escalation from CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab to Cape/5-FU-Bmab is possible after 12 weeks of treatment. Re-escalation to CapeOX/mFOLFOX6-Bmab after progressive disease is considered only for patients who received de-escalation of oxaliplatin after 12 weeks of treatment not caused by oxaliplatin-associated toxicity. A target sample size of 304 evaluable patients is considered sufficient to validate an expected HR for time to failure of strategy of the sequential approach 'wait-and-go' compared to the combination approach 'stop-and go' with 80% power and 2-sided 5% α in case of a true HR<0.69. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study is conducted according to the standards of Good Clinical Practice and in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki 2013 and local regulations, and has been submitted and approved by the Ethical Committee of the Non-Profit Organization MINS Institutional Review Board. The protocol and the trial results, even inconclusive, will be presented at international oncology congresses and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: UMIN000015405, Pre-results.
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.