ArticleOncotarget2017
Targeted first-line therapies for advanced colorectal cancer: a Bayesian meta-analysis.
Article in Oncotarget, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diagnosis and Management of Colorectal Cancer in the Gulf Area: Current Practice and Future Suggestions from Expert Opinions.OncoTargets and therapy · 2025Review
- Article
- The radiation- and chemo-sensitizing capacity of diclofenac can be predicted by a decreased lactate metabolism and stress response.Radiation oncology (London, England) · 2024Article
- YB-1 activating cascades as potential targets in KRAS-mutated tumors.Strahlentherapie und Onkologie : Organ der Deutschen Rontgengesellschaft ... [et al] · 2023Review
- Recent Developments in Combination Chemotherapy for Colorectal and Breast Cancers with Topoisomerase Inhibitors.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Endostatin and Cancer Therapy: A Novel Potential Alternative to Anti-VEGF Monoclonal Antibodies.Biomedicines · 2023Review
- Does cardiology hold pharmacogenetics to an inconsistent standard? A comparison of evidence among recommendations.Pharmacogenomics · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundColorectal cancer is common and deadly. First-line treatments for patients with metastatic disease include FOLFIRI and FOLFOX, which have been combined with anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF antibodies to achieve benefit in selected populations. However, optimal therapy remains unclear.
resultsFifteen publications on 10 trials were identified. There was a lack of decisive evidence that FOLFIRI or FOLFOX impact efficacy of either anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF, across mutational status groups. On the other hand, evidence suggests both anti-EGFR and anti-VEGF may be more effective for MATERIALS AND
methodsLiterature was searched for randomized trials comparing anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF antibodies, paired with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX, as first-line therapy for advanced colorectal cancer. Meta-estimates were generated via Bayesian hierarchical log-linear model. The primary endpoint was overall survival.
conclusionsFurther studies examining impact of all-
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.