Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40467730›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Retrospective stratified analysis of resistance mechanisms to anti-EGFR therapy in mCRC using tumor tissue samples.

Xueming Xia, Wei Du, Qiheng Gou

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
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

3 authors.

Xueming XiaDivision of Head and Neck Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Wei DuDepartment of Targeting Therapy and Immunology, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China.
Qiheng GouDivision of Head and Neck Tumor Multimodality Treatment, Cancer Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China. gouqiheng513@wchscu.cn.

Funding

Sichuan Provincial Science and Technology Support Program 2024YFHZ0051
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The aim of this study was to investigate the mechanisms of acquired resistance to anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), with a focus on the role of KRAS secondary mutations. We sought to evaluate how these mutations contribute to resistance in patients treated with chemotherapy alone or in combination with cetuximab, and to explore the impact of treatment duration and disease progression on mutation rates. We retrospectively collected data from 50 mCRC patients with wild-type KRAS who received either chemotherapy alone or chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR therapy (cetuximab). Following treatment, tumor samples were recollected through surgery, biopsy, or colonoscopy. The secondary mutation status of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF was determined via an amplification refractory mutation system. Based on the nature of the chemotherapy regimen and the presence or absence of tumor progression at the time of the second KRAS mutation analysis, patients were stratified into three groups: Group A (adjuvant chemotherapy and recurrence), Group B (first-line chemotherapy without progression), and Group C (first-line chemotherapy with progression). Secondary KRAS mutations were assessed in relation to therapeutic regimens and progression profiles to investigate the mechanisms of acquired resistance to anti-EGFR therapy. The overall rate of secondary KRAS mutations was 6.0% (3/50). These mutations were not observed in patients treated with chemotherapy alone (0/24), but occurred in 11.5% (3/26) of patients receiving chemotherapy combined with cetuximab. Stratification by treatment regimens and tumor progression showed mutation rates of 0% (0/13) in Group A, 0% (0/16) in Group B, and 14.3% (3/21) in Group C. In Group C, the mutation rate rose from 0% (0/5) in patients receiving chemotherapy alone to 18.8% (3/16) in those receiving combination therapy. Furthermore, in patients receiving chemotherapy combined with cetuximab of Group B and Group C, longer anti-EGFR treatment duration was associated with a higher mutation rate: 5.9% (1/17) in those treated for ≤ 10 months versus 25.0% (2/8) in those treated for > 10 months. Including one case of secondary BRAF mutation, the cumulative mutation rate reached 37.5% (3/8) in patients with prolonged cetuximab exposure. This study innovatively revealed from multiple perspectives that the crucial role of secondary KRAS mutations in the resistance of mCRC patients to EGFR therapy, emphasizes the importance of continuous genomic monitoring, and provides new ideas for future combination targeted therapies.

Indexed as

CetuximabColorectal NeoplasmsDrug Resistance, NeoplasmAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsErbB ReceptorsFemaleGTP PhosphohydrolasesHumansMaleMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedMutationProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafBRAF protein, humanCetuximabEGFR protein, humanErbB ReceptorsGTP PhosphohydrolasesKRAS protein, humanMembrane ProteinsNRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins p21(ras)Acquired resistanceAnti-EGFR therapyClonal evolutionMetastatic colorectal cancerSecondary KRAS mutations

Identifiers

PMID40467730
PMCPMC12137871

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.