ArticleInternational journal of colorectal disease2022
Comparison of safety and efficacy of fluorouracil + oxaliplatin + irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) and modified FOLFOXIRI with bevacizumab for metastatic colorectal cancer: data from clinical practice.
Article in International journal of colorectal disease, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Management of brain metastasis from rectal cancer using whole‑brain radiation therapy followed by bevacizumab and chemotherapy: A case report.Oncology letters · 2023Article
- Polysaccharide-Peptide fromBiomedicines · 2022Review
- Recent Advancements, Limitations, and Future Perspectives of the use of Personalized Medicine in Treatment of Colon Cancer.Technology in cancer research & treatmentReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe efficacy of fluorouracil + oxaliplatin + irinotecan with bevacizumab (FOLFOXIRI + BV) has been verified for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In clinical practice, the original (O-FOLFOXIRI + BV) and modified dose settings (M-FOLFOXIRI + BV) are adopted for Asian patients. We aimed to compare the real-world efficacy and safety of these two regimens.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study reviewed clinical data of all consecutive mCRC patients treated with FOLFOXIRI + BV at a cancer centre in Japan. One hundred patients were divided into two groups: one that received O-FOLFOXIRI + BV (group O, n = 30) and another that received M-FOLFOXIRI + BV (group M, n = 70). Progression-free survival (PFS) was set as the primary endpoint, with overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and safety as secondary endpoints.
resultsPFS was superior in group M (median PFS; 8.7 vs. 11.5 months, P = 0.098). The use of O-FOLFOXIRI + BV emerged as an independent risk factor of poor PFS (hazard ratio = 2.155, P = 0.012). Both ORR (43.3 vs. 65.7%, P = 0.047) and OS (median OS; 17.9 vs. 27.0 months, P = 0.127) were more favourable in group M. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were more frequently observed in group O (90 vs. 74.3%, P = 0.108), whereas dose intensity was higher in group M because a shorter duration was required for cytotoxic drug administration (2.9 vs. 2.6 weeks/course, P = 0.051) in the induction term.
conclusionWe found that M-FOLFOXIRI + BV had more favourable efficacy and safety than O-FOLFOXIRI + BV, which may be a better fit for Asian patients and can be potentially used as an alternative for upfront chemotherapy for mCRC.
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.