Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36942906›Full record

ArticleRadiology and oncology2023

The five-year KRAS, NRAS and BRAF analysis results and treatment patterns in daily clinical practice in Slovenia in 1

Tanja Mesti, Martina Rebersek, Janja Ocvirk

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Radiology and oncology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.2field-weighted citation impact, top 19% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Predictive role of [EJNMMI reports · 2024
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Clinical Medicine Insights. Oncology · 2024
    Review
  5. International journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Tanja MestiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Martina RebersekDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Janja OcvirkDepartment of Medical Oncology, Institute of Oncology Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Institute of Oncology Ljubljana · SIUniversity of Ljubljana · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundWe preformed a Phase IV non-interventional study to assess KRAS, NRAS and BRAF status in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients suitable for 1 PATIENTS AND

methodsPatients with histologically confirmed mCRC adenocarcinoma suitable for first-line treatment fulfilling all inclusion criteria were included in the study. The KRAS, NRAS and BRAF analysis was performed from tissue samples of primary tumor site or metastatic site. All included patients have given consent to participate in the study by signing the informed consent form.

resultsFrom April 2013 to March 2018 at the Institute of Oncology Ljubljana 650 patients were included, 637 of them were treated with first- line systemic treatment according to RAS and BRAF status. Remaining 13 patients with mCRC did not receive systemic first-line treatment. The distribution of patients with KRAS mutated and wild-type tumors, was almost equal, 48.8% and 47.9% respectively, 89 % of the patients had wt NRAS tumours and 86.1% had wt BRAF tumours. The most frequently prescribed treatment was bevacizumab-based therapy (53.1%), either in combination with doublet chemotherapy or with mono-chemotherapy. EGFR inhibitors cetuximab and panitumumab were prescribed in wt RAS mCRC patients (30.9%). The waiting period for biomarkers analysis was two weeks.

conclusionsOur real-world data, single centre 5-year analysis showed that the distribution between wild type and mutated type tumors of the patients with mCRC was approximately the same, as worldwide, so the Slovenian population with mCRC has the same ratio distribution of KRAS, NRAS and BRAF wild and mutated genes. We concluded that a two-week waiting period for biomarkers analysis did not influence the first line treatment decision, so it was in the accordance with the worldwide treatment guidelines based on evidence-based medicine.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafBiomarkersGTP PhosphohydrolasesHumansMembrane ProteinsProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)SloveniaBiomarkersBRAF protein, humanGTP PhosphohydrolasesKRAS protein, humanMembrane ProteinsNRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)metastatic colorectal cancerRAS and BRAF biomarkerssystemic treatment

Identifiers

PMID36942906
PMCPMC10039470
OpenAlexW4328049839

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.