Observational studyInternational journal of clinical oncology2026
Comparison of first-line cetuximab and panitumumab plus doublet chemotherapies for left-sided colorectal cancer: a multicenter real-world observational study by the Japanese Society for Cancer of the Colon and Rectum.
Observational study in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. 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.
- 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
26 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the recommended first-line treatment is anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR) antibodies, such as cetuximab or panitumumab, plus doublet chemotherapy. However, the differences in outcomes between cetuximab and panitumumab remain unknown.
methodsClinical data of patients with left-sided all RAS or KRAS wild-type mCRC who received cetuximab or panitumumab plus doublet chemotherapy were retrospectively collected from 24 institutions in Japan. The patients were divided into two groups: the cetuximab and panitumumab groups. Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and response rate (RR) were compared between the two groups.
resultsA total of 233 patients were enrolled: 87 (37.3%) in the cetuximab group and 146 (62.7%) in the panitumumab group. Median OS, PFS, and RR of the cetuximab and panitumumab groups were 26.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 19.7-33.4) versus 31.8 months (95% CI, 25.7-37.9), 9.7 months (95% CI, 6.9-12.5) versus 12.4 months (11.1-13.7), and 57.8% versus 71.0%, respectively. In multivariate analysis, OS and RR were significantly better in the panitumumab group than in the cetuximab group (adjusted hazard ratio 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.99, p = 0.04; adjusted odds ratio 2.00, 95% CI 1.07-3.73, p = 0.03) and PFS was similar between the two groups (adjusted hazard ratio 0.75, 95% CI 0.55-1.01, p = 0.05).
conclusionAs a first-line treatment for patients with left-sided all RAS or KRAS wild-type mCRC, panitumumab plus doublet chemotherapy may be suggested better efficacy outcomes than cetuximab plus doublet chemotherapy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41779341What 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.