Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30214286›Full record

ArticleCancer management and research2018

Efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis.

Duke Chen, Yu-Shen Wu, Huapeng Lin, Yihan Wang, Longhao Li, Tao Zhang

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer management and research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
0.7field-weighted citation impact, top 26% of its field
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil (TAS-102) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Duke ChenDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China, lilonghaoon@163.com; tumorzt@163.com.
Yu-Shen WuChongqing Key Laboratory of Molecular Oncology and Epigenetics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Huapeng LinDepartment of Hepatobiliary Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China.
Yihan WangDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China, lilonghaoon@163.com; tumorzt@163.com.
Longhao LiDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China, lilonghaoon@163.com; tumorzt@163.com.
Tao ZhangDepartment of Oncology, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, People's Republic of China, lilonghaoon@163.com; tumorzt@163.com.
The Affiliated Yongchuan Hospital of Chongqing Medical University · CNDalian Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTAS-102 has been applied to metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who had received at least two prior regimens of standard chemotherapy. This meta-analysis is designed to assess the efficacy and safety of TAS-102 in patients with mCRC.

methodsWe searched randomized controlled trials (RCTs) through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Cochrane clinical trial databases and clinicaltrial.gov from database initiation to March 2018. The overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate (DCR) and incidence of adverse events were summarized with the use of hazard ratio (HR) or risk ratio (RR).

resultsThree RCTs with 1318 patients were included. Results showed that TAS-102 significantly improved OS (HR 0.70, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.62-0.79) and PFS (HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.40-0.52) in patients who were intolerant or refractory to fluoropyrimidine, irinotecan and oxaliplatin. The pooled odds ratio of DCR was 4.15 (95% CI 3.18-5.43). Notably, there were significant OS benefits both in patients with KRAS mutation (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.63-0.92) and those with wild-type KRAS (HR 0.66, 95% CI 0.55-0.79). These benefits were also observed in patients with different numbers of metastatic sites. However, patients with >18 months since the diagnosis of first metastases seemed to have better OS (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.55-0.77). The most common toxicities associated with TAS-102 were neutropenia (RR 116.51, 95% CI 23.51-577.33), leucopenia (RR 67.70, 95% CI 13.63-336.29), anemia (RR 4.28, 95% CI 2.70-6.79) and diarrhea (RR 5.10, 95% CI 1.40-18.61).

conclusionTAS-102 significantly improves OS, PFS and DCR in refractory mCRC patients with tolerable toxicity. Meanwhile, the OS benefits have nothing to do with KRAS status and the number of metastatic sites.

Indexed as

meta-analysismetastatic colorectal cancerTAS-102

Identifiers

PMID30214286
PMCPMC6118256
OpenAlexW2889052613

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.