Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28379285›Full record

ArticleAnnals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology2017

Identifying an early indicator of drug efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer-a prospective evaluation of circulating tumor cells, 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron-emission tomography and the RECIST criteria.

B Ma, A D King, L Leung, K Wang, A Poon, W M Ho, F Mo, C M L Chan, A T C Chan, S C C Wong

Open access · bronzeAbstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.4field-weighted citation impact, top 12% 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

10 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Liquid Biopsies and Molecular Imaging for Precise Cancer Management.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

10 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

B MaState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
A D KingDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
L LeungState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
K WangDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR.
A PoonState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
W M HoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
F MoState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
C M L ChanState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
A T C ChanState Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Department of Clinical Oncology, Sir Y K Pao Centre for Cancer, Hong Kong Cancer Institute.
S C C WongDepartment of Health Technology and Informatics, Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong SAR, China.
State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South ChinaChinese University of Hong Kong · CNHong Kong Polytechnic University · HK

Funding

Pilot & Feasibility ProgramP30DK043351 · NIDDK · MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL · PI RAYMOND T CHUNG · 1991 to 2026
$35.3M
NIDDK NIH HHS P30 DK043351
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis study investigated the predictive and prognostic significance of assessing early drug response with both positron-emission computerized tomography (PET-CT) and circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients receiving first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND

methodsEligible patients had PET-CT and CTC analysis at baseline and 4-6 weeks after starting chemotherapy, and then a CT scan at 10-12 weeks to assess the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) response. Early response was defined as achieving a dual-endpoint consisting of PET-CT (30% drop in the sum of maximum standard uptake values-SUVmax-of target lesions) and CTC response (CTC < 3 cells/7.5 ml blood) at 4-6 weeks after starting chemotherapy.

resultsAbout 84 patients were enrolled with a median follow-up of 32.9 months (95% confidence interval, CI, 24.5 months-not reached, NR), and 70 patients (84.3%) completed all assessments. Achieving an early response based on the dual-endpoint was independently associated with progression-free survival (hazard ratio, HR = 0.452, 95% CI 0.267-0.765). The median progression-free survival of early responders was 7.41 months (95% CI, 6.05-9.11) compared with 5.37 months (95% CI, 4.68-6.24) in non-responders (log-rank, P = 0.0167). RECIST response at 10 weeks was independently associated with overall survival (OS) (HR = 0.484, 95% CI, 0.275-0.852). Early response based on the dual-endpoint could predict the subsequent RECIST response with a sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of 64%, 70% and 74%, respectively.

conclusionsEarly response based on both PET-CT and CTC analysis has prognostic and probably predictive significance in patients undergoing first-line chemotherapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Its utility as a new tool for assessing early drug response should be further validated.

Indexed as

Multidetector Computed TomographyResponse Evaluation Criteria in Solid TumorsAgedAntineoplastic AgentsColorectal NeoplasmsDisease-Free SurvivalDisease ProgressionEndpoint DeterminationFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansKaplan-Meier EstimateMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingAntineoplastic AgentsFluorodeoxyglucose F18Radiopharmaceuticalscirculating tumor cellscolorectal cancerpositron-emission tomography

Identifiers

PMID28379285
PMCPMC6246388
OpenAlexW2604814056

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.