ReviewCurrent treatment options in oncology2018
Accelerating Therapeutic Development through Innovative Trial Design in Colorectal Cancer.
Review in Current treatment options in oncology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Defining early recurrence in patients with resected primary colorectal carcinoma and its respective risk factors.International journal of colorectal disease · 2021Article
- Circulating tumor DNA guided adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II colon cancer (MEDOCC-CrEATE): study protocol for a trial within a cohort study.BMC cancer · 2020Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
opinion statementCurrent trial design is challenged by the advancement of technologies that have enabled deeper understanding of the molecular drivers of colorectal cancer (CRC). The speed of trial testing and the ability to test larger volumes of promising novel agents in the face of smaller populations identified by molecular profiling are challenges posed to clinical studies. Master protocols that utilize umbrella designs are equipped to deal with potential biomarker and matched treatments simultaneously. Although complex in nature, they increase trial efficiency by utilizing shared screening platforms, test multiple treatments together, and simplify regulatory submission and reporting under a common protocol. Emerging technologies such as circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) may help speed up adjuvant trials. These studies have been traditionally slow to complete due to low event rates and the high numbers needed to recruit. ctDNA used as a surrogate for minimal residual disease (MRD) and as an early marker of relapse may help counter some of these factors that deter innovation in this setting. Finally, in the era of precision medicine, surgery should not be forgotten as the only potentially curative option to date in metastatic disease. Five-year overall survival following resection of liver metastasis exceeds what can be achieved with chemotherapy alone in selected cases. Surgical advances have lowered morbidity and allow for greater resection volumes and repeated interventions. Although historically challenging, a well-designed randomized surgical intervention trial would greatly facilitate moving single-institution guidelines reported by case series into wider clinical practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29488033What 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.