Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38484194›Full record

ArticleJCO global oncology2024

Efficacy of Chemotherapy Rechallenge Versus Regorafenib or Trifluridine/Tipiracil in Third-Line Setting of Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Multicenter Retrospective Comparative Study.

Shouki Bazarbashi, Radwan Alkhatib, Mohamed Aseafan, Yasmin Tuleimat, Nashwa Abdel-Aziz, Mervat Mahrous, Sherif Elsamany, Tusneem Elhassan, Mohammed Alghamdi

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in JCO global oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Randomized Phase II ARC-9 Study of Etrumadenant-Based Therapy versus Regorafenib in Patients with Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2026
    Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 2 countries.

Shouki BazarbashiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Cancer Centre of Excellence, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-8913-8158
Radwan AlkhatibFaculty of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-5210-7817
Mohamed AseafanDepartment of Internal Medicine, Section of Medical Oncology, Security Forces Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-9993-9664
Yasmin TuleimatFaculty of Medicine, Alfaisal University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nashwa Abdel-AzizDepartment of Medical Oncology, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, National Blood and Cancer Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mervat MahrousOncology Department, Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-0818-5260
Sherif ElsamanyOncology Centre, King Abdullah Medical City, Makkah, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0001-5506-6494
Tusneem ElhassanResearch Unit, Cancer Centre of Excellence, King Faisal Specialist Hospital and Research Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammed AlghamdiDepartment of Medical Oncology, King Saud University Medical City, King Saud University, National Blood and Cancer Centre, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID 0000-0002-4121-2507
Alfaisal University · SAKing Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Centre · SAKing Saud Medical City · SAMansoura University · EGRiyadh Armed Forces Hospital · SASecurity Forces Hospital · SA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMetastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is a significant global health burden. This retrospective study compared the effectiveness of trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI), regorafenib, and chemotherapy rechallenge for third-line mCRC treatment. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe reviewed the medical records of 132 patients with mCRC treated with regorafenib, FTD/TPI, or a rechallenge with the initial chemotherapy regimen in a third-line setting from four different institutions. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were objective response rate and overall survival (OS) across the three treatment approaches.

resultsTwenty-nine patients received chemotherapy rechallenge, and 103 received FTD/TPI or regorafenib. Patients' characteristics were comparable, except for a lower number of left-sided primaries and

conclusionThis study suggests that chemotherapy rechallenge may provide a survival benefit in the third-line treatment of mCRC. However, patient characteristics, such as sex and ECOG PS, should also be considered in treatment decisions. Further prospective studies are required to confirm our findings.

Indexed as

Colorectal NeoplasmsFrontotemporal DementiaPhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesPyrrolidinesThymineFemaleHumansMaleRetrospective StudiesTrifluridinePhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesPyrrolidinesregorafenibThyminetipiracilTrifluridine

Identifiers

PMID38484194
PMCPMC10954077
OpenAlexW4392795377

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.