Trial reportClinical colorectal cancer2018
Cetuximab Combined With Induction Oxaliplatin and Capecitabine, Followed by Neoadjuvant Chemoradiation for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: SWOG 0713.
Trial report in Clinical colorectal cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 3 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, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- ESMO-ESTRO consensus statements on the safety of combining radiotherapy with EGFR, ALK, or BRAF/MEK inhibitors.ESMO open · 2026Pooled it
- The Addition of EGFR Inhibitors in Neoadjuvant Therapy for KRAS-Wild Type Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2020Pooled it
- Cell-free DNA and preoperative chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer: a systematic review.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2019Pooled it
- Trial
- Trial
- Integrin β3: structural functions, tumour microenvironment regulatory roles and targeted intervention strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Controversies and Perspectives in the Current Management of Patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer-A Systematic Review.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Total Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Rectal Cancer: Current Facts and Future Strategies.Journal of the anus, rectum and colon · 2023Review
- Inhibition of DNA-PK may improve response to neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy in rectal cancer.Neoplasia (New York, N.Y.) · 2022Article
- Adding Adjuvants to Fluoropyrimidine-based Neoadjuvant Chemoradiotherapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: An Option Worthy of Serious Consideration.Journal of Cancer · 2021Review
- Coelomic Fluid ofEvidence-based complementary and alternative medicine : eCAM · 2020Article
- Evaluation of Efficacy and Tolerance of Radical Radiotherapy and Radiochemotherapy in Treatment of Locally Advanced, Unresectable Rectal Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundNeoadjuvant chemoradiation (NCRT) is standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer. Pathologic complete response (pCR) has associated with improved survival. In modern phase III trials of NCRT, pCR ranges from 10% to 20%. Cetuximab improves response in KRAS (KRAS proto-oncogene) wild type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer. S0713 was designed to assess improvement in pCR with additional use of cetuximab with induction chemotherapy and NCRT for locally advanced, KRAS-wt rectal cancer. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatient eligibility: stage II to III biopsy-proven, KRAS-wt rectal adenocarcinoma; no bowel obstruction; adequate hematologic, hepatic and renal function; performance status of 0 to 2. Target enrollment: 80 patients. TREATMENT: induction chemotherapy with wCAPOX (weekly capecitabine and oxaliplatin) and cetuximab followed by the same regimen concurrent with radiation (omitting day 15 oxaliplatin). If fewer than 7 pCRs were observed at planned interim analysis after 40 patients received all therapy, the study would close. Eighty eligible patients would provide 90% power given a true pCR rate > 35% at a significance of 0.04. The regimen would lack future interest if pCR probability was ≤ 20%.
resultsBetween February 2009 and April 2013, 83 patients registered. Four were ineligible and 4 not treated, leaving 75 evaluable for clinical outcomes and toxicity, of whom 65 had surgery. Of 75 patients, 20 had pCR (27%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 17%-38%); 19 (25%) had microscopic cancer; 36 (48%) had minor/no response (including 10 without surgery). Three-year disease-free survival was 73% (95% CI, 63%-83%).
conclusionOur trial did not meet the pCR target of 35%. Toxicity was generally acceptable. This regimen cannot be recommended outside the clinical trial setting.
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.