ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
TAS-102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) plus bevacizumab versus TAS-102 alone as salvage treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer in routine clinical practice.
Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
- Real-world outcomes and prognostic factors of trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab in metastatic colorectal cancer: a multicenter study in Spain.ESMO gastrointestinal oncology · 2026Article
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
Introduction: Both regimens of TAS-102 (trifluridine/tipiracil) with and without bevacizumab are considered standard options for salvage treatment in patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. Materials and methods: This analysis included patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who received either TAS-102 plus bevacizumab or TAS-102 alone between July 2022 and November 2023 at Samsung Medical Center. We evaluated the objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety profile of both regimens. Results: In total, 139 patients were included in this analysis. Median age was 60.8 years, and median number of previous lines of therapy was four (range: 2.45-6.55). More than half of the subjects (56.8%) had RAS mutations and 92.9% received previous anti-VEGF therapy. 83 (59.7%) patients received the combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab and 56 (40.3%) received TAS-102 alone. The number of patients with prior regorafenib treatment was 14 in the TAS-102 with bevacizumab group and 5 in the TAS-102 alone group. The disease control rate was 51.8% in the combination group and 32.1% in the TAS-102 alone group. The median PFS was 3.3 months (95% CI, 2.7-6.6) in the combination group and 2.5 months (95% CI, 2.0-3.8) in the TAS-102 alone group (HR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.38-0.82; p=0.003). The median OS in these two groups was 10.8 months (95% CI, 8.4-NA) and 6.0 months (95% CI, 4.8-9.8), respectively (HR, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.40-0.97, p=0.033). In the exploratory analysis of TAS-102 + Bev group, patients with the KRAS G12 mutation had inferior OS compared to those without the mutation (HR, 2.01, 95% CI, 1.04-3.90, Conclusions: The combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab resulted in a better survival outcome than TAS-102 monotherapy, consistent with previous studies. This analysis supports the use of the combination of TAS-102 and bevacizumab as the best therapeutic option for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer in clinical practice.
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.