Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39558030›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Clinical oncology2025

Late-line options for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a review and evidence-based algorithm.

Paolo Ciracì, Vittorio Studiale, Ada Taravella, Carlotta Antoniotti, Chiara Cremolini

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Clinical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

5 authors.

Paolo CiracìUnit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3791-6288
Vittorio StudialeUnit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.
Ada TaravellaUnit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-2153-3867
Carlotta AntoniottiUnit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy.
Chiara CremoliniUnit of Medical Oncology 2, Azienda Ospedaliera Universitaria Pisana, Pisa, Italy. chiaracremolini@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0520-4841

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past few years, several novel systemic treatments have emerged for patients with treatment-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, thus making selection of the most effective later-line therapy a challenge for medical oncologists. Over the past decade, regorafenib and trifluridine-tipiracil were the only available drugs and often provided limited clinical benefit compared to best supportive care. Results from subsequent practice-changing trials opened several novel therapeutic avenues, both for unselected patients (such as trifluridine-tipiracil plus bevacizumab or fruquintinib) and for subgroups defined by the presence of actionable alterations in their tumours (such as HER2-targeted therapies or KRAS

Indexed as

AlgorithmsColorectal NeoplasmsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDrug CombinationsEvidence-Based MedicineHumansMolecular Targeted TherapyNeoplasm MetastasisPhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesPyrrolidinesThymineTrifluridineDrug CombinationsPhenylurea CompoundsPyridinesPyrrolidinesregorafenibThymineTrifluridinetrifluridine tipiracil drug combination

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.