ArticleFrontiers in oncology2024
A real-world study: third-line treatment options for metastatic colorectal cancer.
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 5 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Effectiveness and Safety of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review of Real-World Studies.Current oncology reports · 2025Pooled it
- Clinical translation of an immunomodulatory cell therapy that is designed to convert "cold" tumors to "hot": A phase 2B trial in 3L MSS/pMMR metastatic colorectal cancer.Translational oncology · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Hepatic Artery Infusion Chemotherapy Combined With Regorafenib and Sintilimab Versus Regorafenib Alone in MSS/pMMR Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastases After Second-Line Treatment Failure.Cancer medicine · 2026Article
- A Cost Analysis of Adverse Event Management of Systemic Therapies for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer on Patients with at Least Two Previous Lines of Treatment in Spain.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Numerous third-line treatment options exist for colorectal cancer. This study aims to assess the efficacy and safety of third-line therapies, including TKIs (fruquintinib, regorafenib) combined with PD-1 inhibitors, and trifluridine/tipiracil combined with bevacizumab, in patients with refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal cancer who have progressed or are intolerant following standard first- and second-line treatments. Materials and methods: This retrospective analysis collected data from patients with microsatellite stable advanced colorectal adenocarcinoma, diagnosed through histopathology and treated at Henan Provincial Cancer Hospital from May 2019 to April 2023. We compared the efficacy and safety of fruquintinib combined with PD-1 inhibitors, regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitors, and trifluridine/tipiracil combined with bevacizumab. Results: Among 60 eligible patients with refractory microsatellite stable metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma, 29 (48.3%) received fruquintinib combined with PD-1 inhibitors, 15 (25%) received regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitors, and 16 (26.7%) received trifluridine/tipiracil combined with bevacizumab. The average follow-up period was 12.6 months (ranging from 2.3 to 37.6 months). After third-line treatment, the overall objective response rate (ORR) was 8.6%, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 78.6%. The median overall survival (OS) for the regorafenib, fruquintinib, and trifluridine/tipiracil groups was 19.2 months, 14.0 months, and 16.2 months, respectively, with no statistically significant differences observed. However, there were statistically significant differences in progression-free survival (PFS); the median PFS for the regorafenib group was 6.3 months, for the fruquintinib group was 4.2 months, and for the trifluridine/tipiracil group was 5.4 months. Pairwise comparisons indicated that the PFS for the regorafenib group was similar to that for the trifluridine/tipiracil group, both of which were superior to the fruquintinib group. Cox univariate regression analysis revealed that the presence of liver and peritoneal metastases was associated with PFS in third-line treatment. Conclusion: In the third-line treatment of colorectal cancer, regorafenib combined with PD-1 inhibitors and trifluridine/tipiracil combined with bevacizumab showed superiority over fruquintinib combined with PD-1 inhibitors in terms of PFS, but no statistically significant difference in OS was noted among the three groups.
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.