ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2026
Second-line raltitrexed plus irinotecan (SALIRI) with bevacizumab, cetuximab, or alone for metastatic colorectal cancer: a prospective multicenter cohort-based secondary analysis of the SALLY trial.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The prospective multicenter SALLY registry reported that raltitrexed plus irinotecan (SALIRI)-based regimens can be used as second-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Outcomes according to the addition of bevacizumab (Bev), cetuximab (Cet), or no targeted agents are less clear in routine practice. We performed an exploratory secondary analysis of the SALLY registry. Methods: We included patients who received second-line SALIRI + Bev, SALIRI + Cet, or SALIRI alone from the SALLY full analytical set. Treatment was selected by physicians in routine care; patients were not randomized. Tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), and treatment-related adverse events were compared descriptively and with unadjusted statistical tests. Baseline clinicopathologic and molecular characteristics were assessed across groups. Results: The analysis included 1,049 patients: 678 received SALIRI + Bev, 103 received SALIRI + Cet, and 268 received SALIRI alone. Groups were broadly similar in sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status, pathological type, resection status, and metastatic burden, but differed in age, primary tumor location, and molecular profile among tested patients. The SALIRI + Cet group included more patients with left-sided or rectal tumors and Conclusions: In this exploratory, nonrandomized secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter registry, SALIRI combined with Bev or Cet was feasible and tolerable as second-line therapy for mCRC. The observed favorable outcomes in the SALIRI + Cet subgroup should be interpreted cautiously because of nonrandom treatment allocation. Future prospective, biomarker-driven and randomized studies are warranted to define the optimal clinical positioning of SALIRI-based combinations.
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.