Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29721154›Full record

ArticleOncotarget2018

Consensus molecular subtypes classification of colorectal cancer as a predictive factor for chemotherapeutic efficacy against metastatic colorectal cancer.

Akira Okita, Shin Takahashi, Kota Ouchi, Masahiro Inoue, Mika Watanabe, Mareyuki Endo, Hiroshi Honda, Yasuhide Yamada, Chikashi Ishioka

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Oncotarget, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 106 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
106citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

106 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Evaluating [BMJ open · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

46 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Akira OkitaDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Japan.
Shin TakahashiDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Japan.
Kota OuchiDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Japan.
Masahiro InoueDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Akita University Graduate School of Medicine, Akita, Japan.
Mika WatanabeDepartment of Pathology, Tohoku University Graduate School of Medicine, Aobaku, Sendai, Japan.
Mareyuki EndoDepartment of Pathology, Sendai Kousei Hospital, Aobaku, Sendai, Japan.
Hiroshi HondaDepartment of Surgery, Tohoku Rosai Hospital, Aobaku, Sendai, Japan.
Yasuhide YamadaDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Higashiku, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Chikashi IshiokaDepartment of Clinical Oncology, Institute of Development, Aging and Cancer, Tohoku University, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Japan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The consensus molecular subtypes (CMS) classification is one of the most robust colorectal cancer (CRC) classifications based on comprehensive gene expression profiles. This study aimed to clarify whether the CMS is a predictive factor for therapeutic effects of standard chemotherapies for metastatic CRC (mCRC). We retrospectively enrolled 193 patients with mCRCs, and using comprehensive gene expression data, classified them into 4 subtypes: CMS1-CMS4. The associations between the subtypes and treatment outcomes were analyzed. Regarding first-line chemotherapy, irinotecan (IRI)-based chemotherapy was significantly superior to oxaliplatin (OX)-based chemotherapy for progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.31, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.13-0.64) and overall survival (OS; HR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.19-0.99) in CMS4. Regarding the anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) therapy, CMS1 showed particularly worse PFS (HR = 2.50, 95% CI 1.31-4.39) and OS (HR = 4.23, 95% CI 1.83-9.04), and CMS2 showed particularly good PFS (HR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.44-1.01) and OS (HR = 0.49, 95% CI 0.27-0.87) compared with the other subtypes. The biological characteristics of CMS may influence the efficacy of chemotherapy. CMS might be a new predictive factor for the efficacy of chemotherapy against mCRCs.

Indexed as

chemotherapeutic efficacycolorectal cancerconsensus molecular subtypesDNA methylation statuspredictive biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID29721154
PMCPMC5922348

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.