Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31732876›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2019

ECOG performance score 0 versus 1: impact on efficacy and safety of first-line 5-FU-based chemotherapy among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer included in five randomized trials.

Omar Abdel-Rahman

5 registry-linked trialsAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 5 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing 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.

NCT00115765 phase3completednot on this map

PACCE: A Randomized, Open-Label, Controlled, Clinical Trial of Chemotherapy and Bevacizumab With and Without Panitumumab in the First-Line Treatment of Subjects With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmgenRan2005 to 2009Enrolled1,053ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsOxaliplatin Based Chemotherapy, Panitumumab, Irinotecan Based Chemotherapy, Bevacizumab
NCT00272051 phase3completednot on this map

A Multicenter Randomized Dble-Blind Placebo Controlled Phase III Study of the Efficacy of Xaliproden in Reducing the Neurotoxicity of the Oxaliplatin and 5-FU/LV Combination in First-Line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma(MCRC)

TypeinterventionalSponsorSanofiRan2002 to 2004Enrolled620ConditionsMetastases, Colorectal Neoplasms, Colorectal CarcinomaArmsSR57746A
NCT00305188 phase3completednot on this map

A Multicenter, Randomized Double-blind Placebo Controlled Phase III Study of the Efficacy of Xaliproden in Preventing the Neurotoxicity of Oxaliplatin in First-line Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated With Oxaliplatin / 5-FU/LV

TypeinterventionalSponsorSanofiRan2005 to 2009Enrolled879ConditionsMetastases, Colorectal Neoplasms, Colorectal CarcinomaArmsXaliproden (SR57746A), Placebo, Oxaliplatin, 5-Fluorouracil, Leucovorin
NCT00364013 phase3completednot on this map

A Randomized, Multicenter, Phase 3 Study to Compare the Efficacy of Panitumumab in Combination With Oxaliplatin/ 5-fluorouracil/ Leucovorin to the Efficacy of Oxaliplatin/ 5-fluorouracil/ Leucovorin Alone in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorAmgenRan2006 to 2013Enrolled1,183ConditionsMetastatic Colorectal CancerArmsPanitumumab, FOLFOX regimen
NCT00384176 phase2 / phase3completednot on this map

A Randomised, Double-blind, Multicentre Phase II/III Study to Compare the Efficacy of Cediranib (RECENTIN™, AZD2171) in Combination With 5-fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Oxaliplatin (FOLFOX), to the Efficacy of Bevacizumab in Combination With FOLFOX in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorAstraZenecaRan2006 to 2015Enrolled1,814ConditionsColorectal CancerArmsCediranib, Bevacizumab, 5-fluorouracil ( in FOLFOX), Leucovorin (in FOLFOX), Oxaliplatin (in FOLFOX)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Cumulative frailty impact on unplanned hospitalization in older patients with cancer and excellent Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2025
    Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Observational
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
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

1 author.

Omar Abdel-RahmanDepartment of Oncology, Cross Cancer Institute, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta, T4G 1Z2, Canada. omar.abdelsalam@ahs.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5117-2502

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWithin the context of metastatic colorectal cancer, patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance score 0-1 are usually pooled together in clinical practice guidelines and clinical trials' reports. The current study aims to delineate potential differences in outcomes between metastatic colorectal cancer patients with ECOG score 0 versus 1 who are treated with currently accepted first-line fluorouracil (5FU)-based chemotherapy.

methodsThe current study is based on a pooled dataset from five clinical trials of 5FU-based treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (NCT00272051; NCT00115765; NCT00305188; NCT00364013; and NCT00384176). Patients with metastatic colorectal cancer and ECOG score of 0-1 were eligible for the current study. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was used to assess the relationship between ECOG performance status and the development of different toxicities. Kaplan-Meier survival estimates were used to clarify the impact of the ECOG score on overall and progression-free survivals. Multivariable Cox regression analysis was then used to evaluate the impact of ECOG score on overall and progression-free survivals.

resultsA total of 3143 patients were included in the current analysis. Within multivariable logistic regression analysis, patients with an ECOG score of 0 have a lower probability of serious adverse events (OR 0.678; 95% CI 0.583-0.788; P < 0.001), fatal adverse events (OR 0.552; 95% CI 0.397-0.766; P < 0.001), high-grade anemia (OR 0.426; 95% CI 0.252-0.721; P = 0.001), and high-grade nausea/vomiting (OR 0.697; 95% CI 0.509-0.955; P = 0.024). Through Kaplan-Meier survival analysis, patients with an ECOG score of 0 have better overall and progression-free survivals (P < 0.001 for both endpoints). Median overall survival was 27.63 months among patients with an ECOG score of 0 versus 20.00 months among patients with an ECOG score of 1. Within multivariable Cox regression analysis, patients with ECOG score of 0 were associated with better overall and progression-free survivals (HR for overall survival 0.613; 95% CI 0.556-0.676; P < 0.001); (HR for progression-free survival 0.765; 95% CI 0.705-0.829; P < 0.001).

conclusionCompared with patients with ECOG score of 1, patients with ECOG score of 0 have better overall and progression-free survival, and less probability of serious and fatal adverse events. This distinction in outcomes should be noted when choosing appropriate therapeutic strategies and when designing/reporting the results of clinical trials.

Indexed as

Health Status IndicatorsAgedAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsColorectal NeoplasmsDisease ProgressionFemaleFluorouracilHealth StatusHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProgression-Free SurvivalRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicRetrospective StudiesAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticFluorouracilECOGEfficacyOutcomesPerformanceToxicity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.