ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2019
Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Patients with KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated in First Line with Bevacizumab- or Cetuximab-Containing Regimens.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effectiveness and safety of bevacizumab versus cetuximab in the treatment of colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.International journal of clinical pharmacy · 2022Pooled 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
- Real-world outcomes among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated first line with a bevacizumab biosimilar (bevacizumab-awwb).Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2023Article
- Characteristics and Absolute Survival of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated With Biologics: A Real-World Data Analysis From Three European Countries.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- Effect of bevacizumab combined with first-line chemotherapy on metastatic colorectal cancer.American journal of translational research · 2021Article
- Prognostic value of molecular biomarkers in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a real-world study.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021Observational
- 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
- Impact of primary tumor location in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colon cancer treated with first-line chemotherapy plus anti-EGFR or anti-VEGF monoclonal antibodies: a retrospective multicenter study.Journal of Cancer · 2019Article
- Primary Tumor Sidedness Predicts Bevacizumab Benefit in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Understanding the role of primary tumour localisation in colorectal cancer treatment and outcomes.European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) · 2017Review
- What roles do colon stem cells and gap junctions play in the left and right location of origin of colorectal cancers?Journal of cell communication and signaling · 2017Article
- Cost-effectiveness of FOLFOX6+Bevacizumab Versus FOLFOX6+Cetuximab in Stage IV Colorectal Cancer Patients in Shiraz, Iran.Cancer control : journal of the Moffitt Cancer CenterArticle
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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposePatients with Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene wild-type (KRAS WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated in first line with bevacizumab (B) or cetuximab (C) plus standard chemo backbones had comparable outcomes in phase III Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80405. We examined comparative effectiveness of B and C regimens in real-world community settings.
methodsThis retrospective study examined progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in a US community sample of KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B (n = 254) or C (n = 146) regimens. Medical records from the Vector Oncology Data Warehouse were used. Disease progression was determined from patient charts. OS was measured from the start of first-line treatment until death.
resultsThere were no significant difference in either PFS or OS respectively between B-treated compared to C-treated patients (HR = 1.324, 95% CI 0.901, 1.947; HR = 1.080, 95% CI 0.721, 1.617). More B patients received oxaliplatin backbones (74.8 vs. 36.3%), and more C patients received irinotecan backbones (51.4 vs. 20.1%), ps < 0.001. Multivariate survival analyses showed a significant difference indicating a greater risk for death among C-treated patients with right-sided tumors vs. left-sided tumors (HR = 2.263, 95% CI 1.394, 3.673, p = 0.0009), but not for B-treated patients (HR = 1.209, 95% CI 0.825, 1.771, p = 0.3297).
conclusionsConsistent with CALGB 80405, median PFS and OS for these community oncology KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B or C regimens did not differ significantly.
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.