ReviewClujul medical (1957)2017
Molecular targeted treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: the cardiovascular adverse effects of Bevacizumab and Cetuximab.
Review in Clujul medical (1957), 2017. 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, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mobile Mitral and Aortic Valvular Masses in Patients With Hereditary Hemorrhagic Telangiectasia Receiving Intravenous Bevacizumab.Mayo Clinic proceedings. Innovations, quality & outcomes · 2020Article
- COL1A1: A potential therapeutic target for colorectal cancer expressing wild-type or mutant KRAS.International journal of oncology · 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 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Novel emerging therapies have changed paradigms in metastatic colorectal cancer. The advantages of molecular targeted treatments, either the anti-angiogenic or the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor drugs, reside in the fact that while their specificity for the cancer cell is higher, their toxicity on normal tissues is significantly lower when compared to chemotherapy. But when it comes to their safety, especially from a cardiovascular point of view, they still need to pass the test of time and further prospective studies are needed. Clinical trial patients are very well selected with regards to comorbidities and therefore, they often differ from real-life patients. In order to maximize the benefits from these drugs, we need to better identify the population at risk, understand and early diagnose their on- and off-target adverse effects and to adequately choose the diagnostic tools; with a better prevention and early treatment, the quality and quantity of our patients' lives can be significantly improved.
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.