ArticleESMO open2025
FGFR1-amplified colorectal cancer: a distinct prognostic subtype identified through integrated genomic and immunohistochemical profiling.
Article in ESMO open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Prognostic and clinicopathologic significance of FGFR mRNA and protein overexpression in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- A novel prognostic and immune-related biomarkerTranslational cancer research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) alterations are established therapeutic targets in cholangiocarcinoma and urothelial carcinoma but remain understudied in colorectal cancer (CRC). This study investigates the prevalence, clinicopathological correlates, and prognostic impact of FGFR alterations in CRC. PATIENTS AND
methodsWe analyzed 608 stage I-IV CRC samples (2014-2024) through next-generation sequencing (NGS) and immunohistochemistry (IHC). FGFR genomic status was correlated with survival outcomes using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses. External validation of FGFR genomic alterations was carried out using the 19 datasets (n = 6998) with prognostic impact validated through The Cancer Genome Atlas Colon and Rectum Adenocarcinoma (COREAD) dataset (Firehose Legacy, n = 640), both accessed via cBioPortal database.
resultsLarge-scale genomic profiling of CRC [n = 7606 (608 in-house + 6998 public cohorts)] identified FGFR1 amplification (3.8% prevalence) as the predominant FGFR alteration subtype. Multivariable analysis confirmed FGFR alterations as independent predictors of poor disease-free survival [DFS; hazard ratio (HR) 2.58, P = 0.0002] and progression-free survival (PFS; HR 2.17, P = 0.0011), with FGFR1 amplification showing strongest prognostic impact (DFS HR 2.91, PFS HR 2.52, P < 0.01). Notably, the prognostic magnitude of FGFR alterations was comparable to KRAS/BRAF mutations in both localized and metastatic CRC. In addition, we established a semiquantitative immunoreactive score (IRS) system achieving 95.2% concordance with NGS (κ = 0.901), enabling reliable FGFR1 screening in routine pathology workflows.
conclusionsThis study provides the first comprehensive characterization of FGFR genomic alterations in CRC through large-scale profiling (n = 7606), establishing FGFR1 amplification as the predominant alteration. Unlike FGFR2/3-driven malignancies, FGFR1-amplified CRC exhibited aggressive clinical behavior and inferior survival outcomes across disease stages. To address the diagnostic challenges in routine practice, we further developed a validated immunohistochemical scoring system (IRS), establishing a cost-effective and clinically feasible alternative to molecular assays for identifying FGFR1-driven CRC subsets.
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.