ArticleBMC cancer2021
Cetuximab versus bevacizumab following prior FOLFOXIRI and bevacizumab in postmenopausal women with advanced KRAS and BRAF wild-type colorectal cancer: a retrospective study.
Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Trial
- Refractory hypokalemia caused by cetuximab with advanced colorectal cancer patients: the case series and literature review.Anti-cancer drugs · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAn upgraded understanding of factors (sex/estrogen) associated with survival benefit in advanced colorectal carcinoma (CRC) could improve personalised management and provide innovative insights into anti-tumour mechanisms. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of cetuximab (CET) versus bevacizumab (BEV) following prior 12 cycles of fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) plus BEV in postmenopausal women with advanced KRAS and BRAF wild-type (wt) CRC.
methodsProspectively maintained databases were reviewed from 2013 to 2017 to assess postmenopausal women with advanced KRAS and BRAF wt CRC who received up to 12 cycles of FOLFOXIRI plus BEV inductive treatment, followed by CET or BEV maintenance treatment. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), response rate. The secondary endpoint was the rate of adverse events (AEs).
resultsAt a median follow-up of 27.0 months (IQR 25.1-29.2), significant difference was detected in median OS (17.7 months [95% confidence interval [CI], 16.2-18.6] for CET vs. 11.7 months [95% CI, 10.4-12.8] for BEV; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.44-0.89; p=0.007); Median PFS was 10.7 months (95% CI, 9.8-11.3) for CET vs. 8.4 months (95% CI, 7.2-9.6) for BEV (HR, 0.67; 95% CI 0.47-0.94; p=0.02). Dose reduction due to intolerable AEs occurred in 29 cases (24 [24.0%] for CET vs. 5 [4.8%] for BEV; p< 0.001).
conclusionsCET tends to be superior survival benefit when compared with BEV, with tolerated AEs.
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.