ArticleJAMA surgery2018
Association of Primary Tumor Site With Mortality in Patients Receiving Bevacizumab and Cetuximab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.
Article in JAMA surgery, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
25 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- First-line cetuximab versus bevacizumab for RAS and BRAF wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC cancer · 2019Pooled it
- Article
- Iron Metabolism in the Colorectal Tumor Microenvironment: Current Evidence and Clinical Implications.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Evolution of treatment patterns and survival outcomes in non-metastatic rectal cancer: a 15-year real-world single-center analysis.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Integrative Proteogenomic Characterization of Left-Sided and Right-Sided Colorectal Cancer.MedComm · 2026Article
- ERBITAG: Non-interventional study on the efficacy of cetuximab in first-line therapy in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer.BMC cancer · 2026Article
- Article
- Signaling pathways in colorectal cancer implications for the target therapies.Molecular biomedicine · 2024Review
- Impact of Colorectal Cancer Sidedness and Location on Therapy and Clinical Outcomes: Role of Blood-Based Biopsy for Personalized Treatment.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Review
- Short bevacizumab infusion as an effective and safe treatment for colorectal cancer.Molecular and clinical oncology · 2022Article
- Sidedness determines clinical characteristics and survival outcomes in medullary adenocarcinoma of the colon.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Primary Tumor Location and Outcomes After Cytoreductive Surgery and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Peritoneal Metastases of Colorectal Origin.Annals of surgical oncology · 2021Article
- Clinical impact of primary tumour location, early tumour shrinkage, and depth of response in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer with first-line chemotherapy plus cetuximab or bevacizumab.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Cetuximab-Mediated Protection from Hypoxia- Induced Cell Death: Implications for Therapy Sequence in Colorectal Cancer.Cancers · 2020Article
- Primary tumor location and survival in colorectal cancer: A retrospective cohort study.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2020Article
- Sex-related differences in primary metastatic site in rectal cancer; associated with hemodynamic factors?Clinical and translational radiation oncology · 2020Article
- [Therapeutic regimens using monoclonal antibodies in gastroenterology].Der Internist · 2019Review
- Impact of primary tumor location as a predictive factor in patients suffering from colorectal cancer treated with cytotoxic anticancer agents based on the collagen gel droplet-embedded drug sensitivity test.Oncology letters · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Importance: Biologic therapy (BT) (eg, bevacizumab or cetuximab) is increasingly used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Recent investigations have suggested that right- or left-sided primary tumor origin affects survival and response to BT. Objective: To evaluate the association of tumor origin with mortality in a diverse population-based data set of patients receiving systemic chemotherapy (SC) and bevacizumab or cetuximab for mCRC. Design, Setting, and Participants: This population-based nonconcurrent cohort study of statewide California Cancer Registry data included all patients aged 40 to 85 years diagnosed with mCRC and treated with SC only or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab from January 1, 2004, through December 31, 2014. Patients were stratified by tumor origin in the left vs right sides. Interventions: Treatment with SC or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Main Outcomes and Measures: Mortality hazards by tumor origin (right vs left sides) were assessed for patients receiving SC alone or SC plus bevacizumab or cetuximab. Subgroup analysis for patients with wild-type KRAS tumors was also performed. Results: A total of 11 905 patients with mCRC (6713 men [56.4%] and 5192 women [43.6%]; mean [SD] age, 60.0 [10.9] years) were eligible for the study. Among these, 4632 patients received SC and BT. Compared with SC alone, SC plus bevacizumab reduced mortality among patients with right- and left-sided mCRC, whereas SC plus cetuximab reduced mortality only among patients with left-sided tumors and was associated with significantly higher mortality for right-sided tumors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.14-1.51; P < .001). Among patients treated with SC plus BT, right-sided tumor origin was associated with higher mortality among patients receiving bevacizumab (HR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.25-1.36; P < .001) and cetuximab (HR, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.68-2.12; P < .001) BT, compared with left-sided tumor origin. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors (n = 668), cetuximab was associated with reduced mortality among only patients with left-sided mCRC compared with bevacizumab (HR, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.90; P = .002), whereas patients with right-sided mCRC had more than double the mortality compared with those with left-sided mCRC (HR, 2.44; 95% CI, 1.83-3.25, P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: Primary tumor site is associated with response to BT in mCRC. Right-sided primary tumor location is associated with higher mortality regardless of BT type. In patients with wild-type KRAS tumors, treatment with cetuximab benefited only those with left-sided mCRC and was associated with significantly poorer survival among those with right-sided mCRC. Our results underscore the importance of stratification by tumor site for current treatment guidelines and future clinical trials.
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.