ArticleClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2022
Monitoring of RAS mutant clones in plasma of patients with RAS mutant metastatic colorectal cancer.
Article in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Circulating tumor DNA in colorectal cancer: biology, methods and applications.Discover oncology · 2025Review
- Loss of RAS Mutations in Liquid Biopsies of Patients With Multi-Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.The oncologist · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 10 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSome patients with histologically confirmed primary mCRC and mutated RAS reported undetectable RAS mutant clones in plasma after receiving anti-VEGF treatment. The aim was to prospectively assess it with its potential therapeutic implications.
methodsRAS mutant genes in solid biopsy (before first-line treatment: FOLFOX/CAPOX + bevacizumab) were compared in liquid biopsy (before second-line treatment: panitumumab + FOLFIRI), using Idylla™ system. Discordant results between solid/liquid biopsies were assessed by the next-generation sequencing (NGS) test (solid/liquid biopsies).
resultsTwenty-three patients were assessed (seven had RAS mutant discrepancies between solid/liquid biopsies). The NGS test confirmed that 3/23 (13%) patients had undetectable RAS mutant clones in liquid biopsy and 3/23 (13%) presented discrepancies in solid biopsy (Idylla™ system vs. NGS test).
conclusionThirteen percentage of patients had undetectable RAS mutant clones in liquid biopsy after first-line treatment. However, some discrepancies between solid and liquid biopsies have been observed. These results suggest a need to improve accuracy of RAS analyses, especially in solid biopsies.
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.