ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2025
Comparative effectiveness of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab for improving outcomes in metastatic colorectal cancer: a propensity overlap weighting analysis.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Risk of high-grade infections in colorectal cancer patients treated with anti-EGFR monoclonal antibodies: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Pooled it
- Molecular Targeting of EGFR, BRAF, and HER2 Signaling in Colorectal Cancer: Contemporary Advances with Panitumumab, Encorafenib, and Tucatinib.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Colorectal cancer liver metastasis: immunosuppressive microenvironment, signaling pathways, and emerging therapeutic strategies.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Review
- Differential Tumor Response and Conversion Outcomes Associated with First-Line Biologic Strategies in Liver-LimitedOncology research · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeMetastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remains a leading cause of cancer-related mortality despite advancements in targeted therapies. Monoclonal antibody medications-namely, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab-are widely used in combination with chemotherapy as first-line treatments for unresectable mCRC in patients harboring wild-type KRAS tumors. However, the comparative effectiveness of these treatments in improving survival outcomes has not been clearly evaluated. This study aimed to directly compare the effectiveness of these 3 targeted therapies on survival outcomes in patients with unresectable mCRC.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we utilized Taiwan's National Health Insurance Database and Taiwan Cancer Registry to identify patients newly diagnosed with mCRC who were treated with at least 6 cycles of bevacizumab, cetuximab, or panitumumab between 2011 and 2021. Propensity score overlap weighting was applied to adjust for baseline differences, and outcomes were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models. Additionally, subgroup analyses were performed separately for left- and right-sided tumors.
resultsAmong 4,849 patients, treatment with cetuximab and panitumumab was associated with improved overall survival compared to bevacizumab, particularly in patients with left-sided tumors (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.77 and 0.75, respectively). Both cetuximab and panitumumab also showed significantly higher rates of conversion surgery, with panitumumab demonstrating the strongest effect. For right-sided tumors, however, the effectiveness of all 3 agents was limited, and no significant differences were observed in overall survival.
conclusionCetuximab and panitumumab were more effective than bevacizumab at improving survival outcomes and facilitating conversion surgery in left-sided mCRC. These findings highlight the importance of tumor laterality and molecular profiling in guiding therapeutic strategies.
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.