ArticleAmerican journal of cancer research2024
Comparative effectiveness of primary tumor resection versus chemotherapy in patients with asymptomatic unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study using the target trial emulation framework.
Article in American journal of cancer research, 2024. 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.
- Effectiveness of primary tumor resection for survival after first-line cetuximab or bevacizumab in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with subsequent trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib.Annals of coloproctology · 2026Article
- Effectiveness of oxaliplatin-based second-line therapy following cetuximab+FOLFIRI or bevacizumab+FOLFIRI in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer without primary tumor resection.Annals of coloproctology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Patients who undergo primary tumor resection (PTR) reportedly have significantly higher overall survival (OS) than those who do not undergo this procedure. However, this result is only evident in past retrospective studies, and clinical trial results did not show the same trend. Thus, it remains unclear whether primary tumor resection effectively increases survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) across different study designs. We compared the OS of patients with asymptomatic unresectable mCRC who underwent PTR with that of those who did not. This retrospective cohort study was designed to be a target trial emulation of a randomized controlled trial (RCT) that would have compared the effectiveness of PTR versus non-PTR in patients with asymptomatic unresectable mCRC from 2009 to 2017. A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted to compare the efficacy of PTR and non-PTR in patients with mCRC, and corresponding results were compared. This cohort included 1,132 patients for a per-protocol analysis. The PTR group had non-significantly longer survival (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.70, 95% confidence interval: 0.62-1.01) than the non-PTR group in our cohort. A meta-analysis including five RCTs (1,016 patients) and our cohort found that the PTR group did not have a significantly lower mortality rate than the non-PTR group. The results of this cohort study and previous RCTs suggest that PTR is not associated with improved survival compared to systemic chemotherapy combined with targeted therapy among asymptomatic unresectable mCRC patients. Therefore, routine PTR is not recommended in these 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.