ArticleCureus2025
Real-World Experience With Panitumumab or Bevacizumab as a First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: An Indian Perspective.
Article in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Molecular Targeting of EGFR, BRAF, and HER2 Signaling in Colorectal Cancer: Contemporary Advances with Panitumumab, Encorafenib, and Tucatinib.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of panitumumab and bevacizumab in conjunction with first-line chemotherapy in Indian patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Materials and methods A retrospective chart review was performed involving consecutive patients treated between September 2015 and December 2023. Study endpoints included comparisons of the objective response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and adverse drug reactions associated with bevacizumab- and panitumumab-based regimens, along with assessments of the clinical profiles and tumor characteristics of patients with mCRC. Results This study analyzed data from 69 patients, including 30 in the panitumumab group and 39 in the bevacizumab group. The cohort consisted of 42 males (60.9%) and 27 females (39.1%), with a mean age of 54.0 ± 14.05 years. KRAS mutations were identified in 10.2% of patients. No significant differences were observed between the panitumumab and bevacizumab groups in ORR (70% vs. 69.23%, p=0.94), CBR (83.33% vs. 87.18%, p=0.65), or PFS (8.43 vs. 8.17 months, p=0.15). Median OS was 26.13 months in the bevacizumab group, while it was not reached in the panitumumab group at a median follow-up of 15.02 months. Adverse events were more frequent in the bevacizumab group. Additionally, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between bevacizumab- and panitumumab-based regimens for tumors originating on either the left or right side. Conclusions The results of the study show that bevacizumab and panitumumab-based regimens provide comparable outcomes in Indian patients with mCRC.
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.