Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30943928›Full record

Trial reportBMC cancer2019

CTCs as a prognostic and predictive biomarker for stage II/III Colon Cancer: a companion study to the PePiTA trial.

Françoise Rothé, Marion Maetens, Ghizlane Rouas, Marianne Paesmans, Marc Van den Eynde, Jean-Luc Van Laethem, Philippe Vergauwe, Guido Deboever, Yacine Bareche, Caroline Vandeputte and 2 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC cancer, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT00994864 (Preoperative Chemosensitivity Testing as Predictor of Treatment Benefit in Adjuvant Stage III Colon Cancer), which is not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 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.

NCT00994864 nacompletednot on this map

Preoperative Chemosensitivity Testing as Predictor of Treatment Benefit in Adjuvant Stage III Colon Cancer: PePiTA Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorJules Bordet InstituteRan2009 to 2022Enrolled235ConditionsColon CancerArmsFOLFOX
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

12 authors.

Françoise RothéJ.-C. Heuson Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium. francoise.rothe@bordet.be.
Marion MaetensJ.-C. Heuson Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Ghizlane RouasJ.-C. Heuson Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Marianne PaesmansData centre, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Marc Van den EyndeDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Jean-Luc Van LaethemDepartment of Gastroenterology, Erasme University Hospital, Brussels, Belgium.
Philippe VergauweDepartment of Gastroenterology, General Hospital Groeninge, Kortrijk, Belgium.
Guido DeboeverDepartment of Gastroenterology, Digestive Oncology, AZ Damiaan Ziekenhuis, Oostende, Belgium.
Yacine BarecheJ.-C. Heuson Breast Cancer Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Caroline VandeputteGastrointestinal Translational Research Laboratory, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Michail IgnatiadisMedical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.
Alain HendliszMedical Oncology Department, Institut Jules Bordet, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdjuvant therapy improves the prognosis of stage II & III colon cancer patients. Unfortunately, most patients do not benefit from this treatment. PePITA (NCT00994864) is a prospective, multicenter, non-randomized study whose primary objective is to predict the outcome of adjuvant therapy in colon cancer.

methodsThe primary objective was to determine the prognostic and predictive value of circulating tumor cell (CTC) detection before therapy and after one course of preoperative FOLFOX.

resultsOut of the 58 first patients accrued in PePiTA trial, 36 patients participated in the CTC companion study, of whom 32 had at least one evaluable sample. Only 5 patients (14, 95% CI = 5-30%) had ≥1 CTC/22.5 ml blood in at least one of the two timepoints with 2 patients having ≥1 CTC/22.5 ml at baseline (6, 95% CI: 1-19%). The detection rate of patients with CTCs at baseline being lower than expected, the inclusion of patients in the PePiTA CTC substudy was stopped. The limited sample size did not allow us to investigate the prognostic and predictive value of CTCs in locally advanced colon cancer.

conclusionsOur data illustrate the need for further standardized studies in order to find the most reliable prognostic/predictive biomarker in early-stage colon cancer.

trial registrationThis trial was prospectively registered at Jules Bordet institute ( NCT00994864 ) on the October 14, 2009.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsColonic NeoplasmsNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleFluorouracilHumansLeucovorinMaleMiddle AgedNeoadjuvant TherapyNeoplasm StagingOrganoplatinum CompoundsPredictive Value of TestsFluorouracilLeucovorinOrganoplatinum Compounds

Identifiers

PMID30943928
PMCPMC6446374

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.