ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023
Survival and Toxicities of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Treated with Regorafenib before TAS-102 or Vice Versa: A Mono-Institutional Real-Practice Study.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Genetic, Epidemiological, Clinical, and Therapeutic Trajectories in Colon and Rectal Cancers.Cancers · 2025Review
- Article
- Efficacy and safety of regorafenib for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer in routine clinical practice: results from a Spanish hospital.Frontiers in oncology · 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
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Regorafenib and TAS-102 are two orally-administered drugs used to treat refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This study was performed to explore any differences between different therapy sequences: TAS-102 first or regorafenib first. Patients and methods: This is a retrospective and real-practice study in mCRC patients treated according to the ESMO guidelines. They received TAS-102 first (regorafenib second, TR) or regorafenib first (TAS-102 second, RT) at standard doses. Responses to therapy and toxicities were evaluated by RECIST and CTCAE v4.0, respectively. Associations between clinical and pathologic variables and different therapy sequences were evaluated by χ2-test. p <0.05 was considered statistically significant. A description of any differences in overall survival (OS) between TR and RT was the primary outcome. OS curves were depicted through the Kaplan−Meier product limit. All statistical analyses were performed by the Excel software and MedCalc® version 20.112. Results: Sixty-five patients were analyzed. Twenty-eight received regorafenib before TAS-102, 37 vice versa. Responsiveness to first-line chemotherapy as well as disease control were not different between RT and TR patients. G4 toxicities were very rare. The three most common G1/G2 toxicities with regorafenib were fatigue, anemia, and cutaneous rash; anemia, fatigue, and neutropenia with TAS-102. Compliance to treatment was lower in TAS-102 patients compared to regorafenib. Interestingly, analysis of OS showed a significant difference at Log Rank test (p = 0.0366) in favor of TR (median OS: 4.5 months) compared to RT (median OS: 3.0 months; HR: 0.55; 95% CI: 0.31−0.96). Conclusions: we found a significant difference in terms of survival in favor of the TR sequence of treatment. Larger studies are needed to confirm these data and explore specific biomarkers predicting the correct sequence of oral drugs in the treatment of refractory mCRC patients.
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.