ArticleClinical drug investigation2018
First-Line Cetuximab Monotherapy in KRAS/NRAS/BRAF Mutation-Negative Colorectal Cancer Patients.
Article in Clinical drug investigation, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Distinct Driver Pathway Enrichments and a High Prevalence ofInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024Article
- Molecular Network of Colorectal Cancer and Current Therapeutic Options.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Review
- Molecular testing for colorectal cancer: Clinical applications.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2021Review
- Modern Approaches to Testing Drug Sensitivity of Patients' Tumors (Review).Sovremennye tekhnologii v meditsine · 2021Review
- Drug-Drug Interactions of Irinotecan, 5-Fluorouracil, Folinic Acid and Oxaliplatin and Its Activity in Colorectal Carcinoma Treatment.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
23 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundColorectal carcinomas (CRCs) are sensitive to treatment by anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) antibodies only if they do not carry activating mutations in down-stream EGFR targets (KRAS/NRAS/BRAF). Most clinical trials for chemo-naive CRC patients involved combination of targeted agents and chemotherapy, while single-agent cetuximab or panitumumab studies included either heavily pretreated patients or subjects who were not selected on the basis of molecular tests. We hypothesized that anti-EGFR therapy would have significant efficacy in chemo-naive patients with KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutation-negative CRC.
methodsNineteen patients were prospectively included in the study.
resultsTwo (11%) patients experienced partial response (PR) and 11 (58%) subjects showed stable disease (SD). Median time to progression approached 6.1 months (range 1.6-15.0 months). Cetuximab efficacy did not correlate with RNA expression of EGFR and insulin-like growth factor 2 (IGF2). Only one tumor carried PIK3CA mutation, and this CRC responded to cetuximab. Exome analysis of patients with progressive disease (PD) revealed 1 CRC with high-level microsatellite instability and 1 instance of HER2 oncogene amplification; 3 of 4 remaining patients with PD had allergic reactions to cetuximab, while none of the subjects with PR or SD had this complication. Comparison with 19 retrospective KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutation-negative patients receiving first-line fluoropyrimidines revealed no advantages or disadvantages of cetuximab therapy.
conclusionsCetuximab demonstrates only modest efficacy when given as a first-line monotherapy to KRAS/NRAS/BRAF mutation-negative CRC patients. It is of question, why meticulous patient selection, which was undertaken in the current study, did not result in the improvement of outcomes of single-agent cetuximab treatment.
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.