Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33630242›Full record

ReviewClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2021

Patient profiles as an aim to optimize selection in the second line setting: the role of aflibercept.

B González Astorga, F Salvà Ballabrera, E Aranda Aguilar, E Élez Fernández, P García-Alfonso, E González Flores, R Vera García, A Fernández Montes, A M López Muñoz, A Salud Salvia

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 36% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. 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

10 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

B González AstorgaHospital Universitario Clínico San Cecilio, Granada, Spain.
F Salvà BallabreraHospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
E Aranda AguilarHospital Universitario Reina Sofía, Córdoba, Spain.
E Élez FernándezHospital Universitari Vall d'Hebron, Barcelona, Spain.
P García-AlfonsoHospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, Spain.
E González FloresHospital Universitario Virgen de Las Nieves, Granada, Spain.
R Vera GarcíaComplejo Hospitalario de Navarra, Navarra, Spain. ruth.vera.garcia@navarra.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1524-3147
A Fernández MontesComplexo Hospitalario de Ourense, Ourense, Spain.
A M López MuñozHospital Universitario de Burgos, Burgos, Spain.
A Salud SalviaHospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova, Lleida, Spain.
Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari · ESComplejo Hospitalario de Navarra · ESComplejo Hospitalario de Ourense · ESHospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón · ESHospital Universitari Arnau de Vilanova · ESHospital Universitario de Burgos · ESHospital Universitario Reina Sofía · ESHospital Universitario Virgen de las Nieves · ESInstituto de Investigación Biosanitaria de Granada · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer-related death worldwide. For metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients, it is recommended, as first-line treatment, chemotherapy (CT) based on doublet cytotoxic combinations of fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) and fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX). In addition to CT, biological (targeted agents) are indicated in the first-line treatment, unless contraindicated. In this context, most of mCRC patients are likely to progress and to change from first line to second line treatment when they develop resistance to first-line treatment options. It is in this second line setting where Aflibercept offers an alternative and effective therapeutic option, thought its specific mechanism of action for different patient's profile: RAS mutant, RAS wild-type (wt), BRAF mutant, potentially resectable and elderly patients. In this paper, a panel of experienced oncologists specialized in the management of mCRC experts have reviewed and selected scientific evidence focused on Aflibercept as an alternative treatment.

Indexed as

Drug SubstitutionAge FactorsAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBevacizumabCamptothecinClinical Trials, Phase III as TopicColorectal NeoplasmsFluorouracilGenes, rasHumansLeucovorinLiver NeoplasmsLung NeoplasmsMutationafliberceptAngiogenesis InhibitorsAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalBevacizumabBRAF protein, humanCamptothecinFluorouracilLeucovorinOrganoplatinum CompoundsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafReceptors, Vascular Endothelial Growth FactorRecombinant Fusion ProteinsVascular Endothelial Growth Factor AAfliberceptBRAFColorectal cancerMetastaticMutationPatient profilePatient selectionRASTreatment

Identifiers

PMID33630242
PMCPMC8238745
OpenAlexW3130418141

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.