ReviewJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2026
Later-line Treatment Selection in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Trifluridine/Tipiracil Plus Bevacizumab, Regorafenib, and Fruquintinib.
Review in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Later-line therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) increasingly requires selection among treatments with different mechanisms, toxicity profiles, and sequencing evidence. Trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab has robust randomized evidence from SUNLIGHT, but objective response remains uncommon and hematologic toxicity can limit treatment delivery in heavily pretreated patients. Regorafenib and fruquintinib are minimally myelosuppressive oral alternatives, yet they differ in dose strategy, hepatotoxicity, hand-foot skin reaction, hypertension, and proteinuria. This narrative review updates pivotal and recent evidence and proposes an evidence-informed framework that treats hematologic reserve as a clinical fitness construct rather than a fixed laboratory threshold. We additionally examine the clinical implications of low response rates, prior anti-angiogenic exposure, emerging molecular predictors including KRAS G12, evidence in older or vulnerable patients, and recent phase III developments. Current data do not support a validated molecular biomarker for choosing among these three options, and no randomized head-to-head comparison of regorafenib and fruquintinib exists. Accordingly, treatment selection should be individualized according to prior therapies, toxicity vulnerability, organ function, tumor tempo, and patient goals. Hypertension and proteinuria are important selection factors but may also be modifiable treatment-delivery factors. The proposed algorithms and adverse-event radar chart are intended as practical visual syntheses rather than validated guidelines or formal cross-trial comparisons.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42900313What 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.