ArticleTherapeutic advances in medical oncology2020
Effectiveness of bevacizumab in first- and second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: ITACa randomized trial.
Article in Therapeutic advances in medical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Use of Sequential Multiple Assignment Randomized Trials (SMARTs) in oncology: systematic review of published studies.British journal of cancer · 2023Pooled it
- A review of use of external data and update on reporting standards in Sequential Multiple-Assignment Randomised Trials.Clinical trials (London, England) · 2026Review
- Impact of bevacizumab on clinical outcomes and its comparison with standard chemotherapy in metastatic colorectal cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice · 2024Article
- Patient profiles as an aim to optimize selection in the second line setting: the role of aflibercept.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2021Review
- Are All Anti-Angiogenic Drugs the Same in the Treatment of Second-Line Metastatic Colorectal Cancer? Expert Opinion on Clinical Practice.Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCancer trials involving multiple treatment lines substantially increase our understanding of therapeutic strategies. However, even when the primary end-point of these studies is progression-free survival (PFS), their statistical analysis usually focuses on each line separately, or does not consider repeated events, thus missing potentially relevant information. Consequently, the evaluation of the effectiveness of treatment strategies is highly impaired.
methodsWe evaluated the potentially different effect of bevacizumab (B) administered for the first- or second-line treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in the ITACa (Italian Trial in Advanced Colorectal Cancer) randomized trial. The ITACa trial consisted of two arms: first-line chemotherapy (CT)+B followed by second-line CT alone
resultsThe overall effect of B across the two lines resulted in a HR = 0.80 (95% CI 0.68-0.95,
conclusionOur results seem to suggest that B confers a PFS advantage when administered in combination with second-line chemotherapy, which could help to improve current international guidelines on optimal sequential treatment strategies.
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.