ArticleMedical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre2024
A Real-World Retrospective Study to Evaluate the Reliability of Cetuximab plus Capecitabine versus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy in Patients with RAS and BRAF Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.
Article in Medical principles and practice : international journal of the Kuwait University, Health Science Centre, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
- Old tale new admirers, cetuximab maintenance in metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2026Pooled it
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
backgroundThe optimal maintenance therapy for rat sarcoma (RAS) and v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B (BRAF) metastatic colorectal cancers (mCRCs) remains unclear. It is critical to evaluate the reliability of cetuximab-capecitabine (the observation group) relative to capecitabine alone (control group). PATIENTS AND
methodsIn this retrospective analysis, patients with RAS and BRAF mCRC admitted to Huizhou Municipal Central Hospital, between January 2016 and October 2020 were enrolled and treated with cetuximab plus 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) as an initial therapy. Patients whose disease was controlled after at least six cycles of treatment were administered a maintenance therapy until disease progression. We also analyzed the prognosis of patients according to clinicopathological features. Altogether, 39 RAS and BRAF mCRC patients were recruited from January 2016 to October 2020, with 18 cases in the treatment group and 21 cases in the control group. The difference in baseline clinicopathological features between the two treatments is not obvious.
resultsThe median progression-free survival after maintenance treatment in observation group (9.5 months [95% confidence interval (CI) = 6.4-12.6]), was significantly better than the control group (7.3 months [95% CI = 5.8-8.8]). During maintenance treatment, there were no deaths caused by treatment-related adverse events, and the overall incidence of rash acne was different between the observation and control groups (p < 0.05). Most adverse events were mild and easily controlled. Primary tumor site, baseline carcinoembryonic antigen levels, and microsatellite instability status were independent prognostic factors.
conclusionMaintenance therapy using cetuximab plus capecitabine improved survival in patients with mCRC and was well tolerated by 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.