| Title |
Treatment Patterns and Outcomes in Patients with KRAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Treated in First Line with Bevacizumab- or Cetuximab-Containing Regimens
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12029-017-0027-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Arthur C. Houts, Sarika Ogale, Nicolas Sommer, Sacha Satram-Hoang, Mark S. Walker |
| Abstract |
Patients with Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene wild-type (KRAS WT) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) treated in first line with bevacizumab (B) or cetuximab (C) plus standard chemo backbones had comparable outcomes in phase III Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) 80405. We examined comparative effectiveness of B and C regimens in real-world community settings. This retrospective study examined progression-free survival (PFS) and OS in a US community sample of KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B (n = 254) or C (n = 146) regimens. Medical records from the Vector Oncology Data Warehouse were used. Disease progression was determined from patient charts. OS was measured from the start of first-line treatment until death. There were no significant difference in either PFS or OS respectively between B-treated compared to C-treated patients (HR = 1.324, 95% CI 0.901, 1.947; HR = 1.080, 95% CI 0.721, 1.617). More B patients received oxaliplatin backbones (74.8 vs. 36.3%), and more C patients received irinotecan backbones (51.4 vs. 20.1%), ps < 0.001. Multivariate survival analyses showed a significant difference indicating a greater risk for death among C-treated patients with right-sided tumors vs. left-sided tumors (HR = 2.263, 95% CI 1.394, 3.673, p = 0.0009), but not for B-treated patients (HR = 1.209, 95% CI 0.825, 1.771, p = 0.3297). Consistent with CALGB 80405, median PFS and OS for these community oncology KRAS WT mCRC patients treated with first-line B or C regimens did not differ significantly. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 23 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 4 | 17% |
| Other | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 13% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 17% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 14 | 61% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 9% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 4% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 4% |
| Unknown | 5 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 November 2017.
All research outputs
#20,452,930
of 23,008,860 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer
#311
of 527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#372,705
of 437,841 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Gastrointestinal Cancer
#6
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,008,860 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 527 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.0. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 437,841 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.