Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30988631›Full record

ReviewOncoTargets and therapy2019

Selecting treatment options in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

Margaret Byrne, Muhammad Wasif Saif

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in OncoTargets and therapy, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 15% 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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Margaret ByrneNorthwell Health Cancer Institute, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra, Lake Success, NY, USA, wsaif@northwell.edu.
Muhammad Wasif SaifNorthwell Health Cancer Institute, Donald and Barbara Zucker School of Medicine at Hofstra, Lake Success, NY, USA, wsaif@northwell.edu.
Northwell Health · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Survival of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) has significantly improved in the last decade. Survival gains are not driven by advances in first-line therapy but by incremental additional effects of subsequent treatment lines. To maximize outcomes, patients should receive all active agents. Identification of patient subgroups is increasing individualization of treatment. Novel oral agents, such as regorafenib and TAS-102, as well as promising immunotherapeutic agents have offered salvage treatment options for refractory mCRC. Although most therapeutic developments for mCRC in the chemorefractory setting focuses on new targets and/or more potent agents, reconsideration of established targets has gained importance with the growth of a rational pharmacogenomic approach to drug development, such as HER2. The authors describe treatment options for patients with refractory colon cancer following first- and second-line therapy.

Indexed as

advancedbevacizumabcetuximabcolon cancerepidermal growth factor receptorfluoropyrimidineFOLFIRIHER2KRASLonsurfNRASpanitumumabPD-1 inhibitorplatelet-derived growth factor receptorsrefractoryregorafenibTKIvascular endothelial growth factor receptor

Identifiers

PMID30988631
PMCPMC6441549
OpenAlexW2925220913

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.