Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39810491›Full record

ArticleCancer research and treatment2025

Clinical Characteristics of and Treatment Pattern for EGFR-Amplified Colorectal Cancer.

Seong-Eun Kim, Hyehyun Jeong, Sun Young Kim, Jeong Eun Kim, Yong Sang Hong, Deokhoon Kim, Jihun Kim, Ji Sung Lee, Tae Won Kim

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer research and treatment, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Seong-Eun KimDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Hyehyun JeongDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Sun Young KimDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jeong Eun KimDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Yong Sang HongDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Deokhoon KimDepartment of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Jihun KimDepartment of Pathology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Ji Sung LeeClinical Research Center, Asan Institute for Life Sciences, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Tae Won KimDepartment of Oncology, Asan Medical Center, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study aimed to compare clinicopathologic features and clinical outcomes of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) based on epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) amplification status. MATERIALS AND

methodsPatients with mCRC who underwent next-generation sequencing using a targeted 244-gene panel from 2016 to 2021 were identified and screened for EGFR copy numbers. Cases with at least five copies were reviewed for tumor purity adjustment, and those with an adjusted copy number of ≥ 6 were defined as EGFR-amplified (EGFR amp+). Their clinical characteristics were compared with those without EGFR amplification (EGFR amp-).

resultsAmong 2,421 patients, 35 (1.4%) were EGFR amp+. Clinical characteristics did not significantly differ according to EGFR amplification status, but EGFR amp+ cases had fewer instances of peritoneal seeding (8.6% vs. 21.8%). Overall survival (OS) tended to be better in EGFR amp+ patients compared with EGFR amp- patients (median OS [mOS], 76 vs. 37 months; p=0.145). Among 572 patients who received anti-EGFR antibody-based chemotherapy (anti-EGFR CTx) during disease course, mOS tended to be better in 16 EGFR amp+ patients (79 months) compared with 556 EGFR amp- patients (39 months, p=0.048). Seven out of 35 EGFR amp+ patients were treated with front-line anti-EGFR CTx, and their progression-free survival did not differ from that of EGFR amp- patients treated with front-line anti-EGFR CTx (20 vs. 14 months, p=0.344).

conclusionThis study may suggest a favorable predictive impact of EGFR amplification in patients treated with anti-EGFR CTx. However, the benefit of front-line anti-EGFR antibody treatment in this group was not notable.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsBiomarkers, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsGene AmplificationAdultAgedAged, 80 and overErbB ReceptorsFemaleHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMaleMiddle AgedPrognosisRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeBiomarkers, TumorEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsAmplificationColorectal neoplasmsEpidermal growth factor receptors

Identifiers

PMID39810491
PMCPMC12527622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.