ArticleAnnals of coloproctology2026
Effectiveness of primary tumor resection for survival after first-line cetuximab or bevacizumab in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer treated with subsequent trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib.
Article in Annals of coloproctology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe optimal sequencing of targeted therapies and the role of primary tumor resection (PTR) in KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) remain unclear. This study compared survival outcomes in patients treated with first-line cetuximab plus FOLFIRI (folinic acid, 5-fluorouracil, and irinotecan) versus bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI, followed by second-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy and later-line trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study used Taiwan's National Health Insurance Research Database and the Taiwan Cancer Registry. Patients diagnosed with mCRC between 2013 and 2019 were included if they received first-line cetuximab or bevacizumab plus FOLFIRI, followed by later-line trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib. Patients were stratified by PTR status. Primary endpoints were overall survival and survival during trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib treatment. Secondary endpoints included time to treatment discontinuation (TTD) and TTD during trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib therapy. Stabilized inverse probability of treatment weighting was used for adjustment.
resultsAmong 559 patients, 278 were assigned to the non-PTR group and 281 to the PTR group. In the non-PTR group, the cetuximab cohort demonstrated significantly longer survival during trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib therapy (6.2 months vs. 4.9 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.72) and longer TTD1 (the interval between initiation of first-line therapy and the start of second-line chemotherapy; 11.8 months vs. 9.5 months; HR, 0.67) than the bevacizumab cohort. Survival differences between regimens were less pronounced among patients who underwent PTR.
conclusionFirst-line cetuximab plus FOLFIRI may confer a survival advantage over bevacizumab in patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC without PTR, including during later-line therapy with trifluridine/tipiracil or regorafenib, whereas bevacizumab appears to provide more consistent benefits in those with PTR.
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.