ArticleTranslational oncology2025
Tumoral and circulating genomic landscape inform survival differences in colorectal carcinomatosis.
Article in Translational oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) are the third most common site of metastatic spread of colorectal cancer and are associated with worse survival than other sites of metastatic disease. In recent years tumoral circulating tumoral DNA (ctDNA) mutational status has been increasingly utilized in clinical decision making for metastatic colorectal cancer patients despite its utility in CPM being poorly understood. Here we describe standard of care performed mutational profiles and associated outcomes for unresectable CPM patients, with a contextual comparison to 160 unresected colorectal liver metastases (CLM) patients. Of 508 patients, 288 (57 %) had CPM alone and 220 (43 %) had CPM with extraperitoneal metastases. Patients with synchronous CPM and CLM had worse overall survival (HR 1.67 [95 %CI 1.26-2.22]). Mutations in ctDNA were noted in 110/145 (75.9 %) of CPM patients, with mutations in KRAS or PIK3CA ctDNA being associated with worse survival. Importantly, the association between tumoral mutational profile and survival differed by site of metastatic disease. The prognostic significance of specific mutations, particularly BRAF and KRAS, differs between patients with CPM and CLM, and supports the distinct biology of these metastatic sites and the importance of tissue and circulating genomic profiling to risk-stratify these patients according to site of metastasis.
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.