SynthesisMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2019
Comparison of Regorafenib, Fruquintinib, and TAS-102 in Previously Treated Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Five Clinical Trials.
Synthesis in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 23 citations in OpenAlex.
- Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Multitargeted Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors in Patients With Intractable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentPooled it
- A Phase II Exploratory Study to Identify Biomarkers Predictive of Clinical Response to Regorafenib in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Who Have Failed First-Line Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Trial
- Sequential Treatment with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Survival Outcomes with Regorafenib and/or Trifluridine/Tipiracil Sequencing to Rechallenge with Third-Line Regimens in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Real-World Subgroup Comparison from the ReTrITA Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2024Article
- Article
- Treatment Settings and Outcomes with Regorafenib and Trifluridine/Tipiracil at Third-Line Treatment and beyond in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Real-World Multicenter Retrospective Study.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Using a combination of fruquintinib, raltitrexed, and S-1 as a third-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer with co-existence of Hodgkin lymphoma: a case report.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2023Article
- Comparison of the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib and regorafenib in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: A real-world study.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Real-World Utilization, Barriers, and Factors Associated With the Targeted Treatment of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients in China: A Multi-Center, Hospital-Based Survey Study.International journal of public health · 2023Article
- Review
- A multi-center effectiveness comparison study of fruquintinib with constructed external control cohort of other targeted kinase inhibitors using real-world data in third-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Case Report: Severe Rashes Associated With Fruquintinib in a Patient With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
- TAS-102 Monotherapy and Combination Therapy with Bevacizumab for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Gastroenterology research and practice · 2021Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Fruquintinib Plus PD-1 Inhibitors Versus Regorafenib Plus PD-1 Inhibitors in Refractory Microsatellite Stable Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND This study aimed to conduct a systematic review of the literature to identify key randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs), followed by network meta-analysis, to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of regorafenib, fruquintinib, and TAS-102 in previously treated patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC). MATERIAL AND METHODS Systematic literature review was performed using the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane library online databases to identify published randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Hazard ratios (HRs) for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and the odds ratios (ORs) for the objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), adverse events (AEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), and fatal adverse events (FAEs) were compared indirectly using network meta-analysis based on a random-effects model. RESULTS Five RCTs that included 2,604 patients fulfilled the eligibility criteria and were analyzed. Indirect comparisons showed that fruquintinib was associated with significant superiority for PFS (HR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.34-0.95) and DCR (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.08-3.01) when compared with TAS-102 in patients with mCRC. However, there was no significant difference between OS or ORR between regorafenib, fruquintinib, and TAS-102. Fruquintinib was associated with a significantly higher risk of SAEs when compared with TAS-102 or regorafenib. There was no significant difference in the risk of AEs or FAEs following indirect comparison between fruquintinib, regorafenib, and TAS-102. CONCLUSIONS The findings from network meta-analysis showed that fruquintinib was associated with significant superiority for PFS and DCR compared with TAS-102, but fruquintinib was associated with significantly increased risk for SAEs compared with regorafenib and TAS-102.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.