Cited by 710Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesColorectal Cancer Surgical TreatmentsGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

Prognostic and Predictive Relevance of Primary Tumor Location in Patients With RAS Wild-Type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Retrospective Analyses of the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 Trials

Open access
Tejpar, Sabine, Stintzing, Sebastian, Ciardiello, Fortunato, Tabernero, Josep, Van Cutsem, Eric, Beier, Frank, Esser, Regina, Lenz, Heinz-Josef +1 more·2017·JAMA Oncology

Abstract

IMPORTANCE: Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is heterogeneous, and primary tumors arising from different regions of the colon are clinically and molecularly distinct. OBJECTIVE: To examine the prognostic and predictive value of primary tumor location in patients with RAS wild-type (wt) mCRC treated with first-line fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI) plus cetuximab in the Cetuximab Combined With Irinotecan in First-line Therapy for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (CRYSTAL) trial and FOLFIRI Plus Cetuximab Versus FOLFIRI Plus Bevacizumab as First-Line Treatment For Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (FIRE-3) trial. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this retrospective analysis patients with RAS wt metastatic colorectal cancer from the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 trials were classified as having left-sided or right-sided mCRC, defined, respectively, as patients whose tumors originated in the splenic flexure, descending colon, sigmoid colon, or rectum vs appendix, cecum, ascending colon, hepatic flexure, or transverse colon. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were assessed according to tumor location and treatment arm. RESULTS: In the RAS wt populations of the CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 trials, patients with left-sided tumors (n = 142 and n = 157, respectively) had markedly superior PFS, OS, and ORR compared with patients with right-sided tumors (n = 33 and n = 38, respectively). Among CRYSTAL and FIRE-3 study patients with RAS wt left-sided tumors, FOLFIRI plus cetuximab significantly improved OS relative to the respective comparators (FOLFIRI and FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab); in contrast, in RAS wt patients with poor-prognosis right-sided tumors, limited efficacy benefits were observed upon the addition of cetuximab to FOLFIRI in CRYSTAL, and comparable outcomes were observed between the FOLFIRI plus cetuximab and FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab arms of FIRE-3. A significant interaction was observed between primary tumor location and treatment for OS (CRYSTAL: hazard ratio [HR], 1.95; 95% CI, 1.09-3.48 and FIRE-3: HR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.23-0.70) within the RAS wt populations of both studies in multivariable models that also included sex, prior adjuvant therapy, and BRAF mutational status. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In the RAS wt populations of CRYSTAL and FIRE-3, patients with left-sided tumors had a markedly better prognosis than those with right-sided tumors. First-line FOLFIRI plus cetuximab clearly benefitted patients with left-sided tumors (vs FOLFIRI or FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab, respectively), whereas patients with right-sided tumors derived limited benefit from standard treatments. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifiers: CRYSTAL, NCT00154102, and FIRE-3, NCT00433927.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3797

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Tejpar, S., Stintzing, S., Ciardiello, F., Tabernero, J., Van Cutsem, E., Beier, F., Esser, R., Lenz, H.-J., & Heinemann, V.
Affiliations
  • Universitair Ziekenhuis Leuven (BE)
  • Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (DE)
  • University of Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (IT)
  • Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona (ES)
  • Digestive Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven and KULeuven, Leuven, Belgium
  • Merck KGaA, Darmstadt (Germany) (DE)
  • University of Southern California (US)
Corresponding author
Tejpar, Sabine
Venue
JAMA Oncology
Published
2017-02-01
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
194
ISSN
2374-2437 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2531319683
Cited by
709
References
24
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 35 · 2024: 64 · 2023: 48 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 85 · 2019: 97 · 2018: 102 · 2017: 96 · 2016: 3
FWCI
53.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JAMA Oncology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • Archivio Istituzionale della Ricerca - Università degli Studi della Campania "Luigi Vanvitelli" (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Cancer Institute (P30CA014089)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
metastatic colorectal cancer, RAS wild-type, primary tumor site, cetuximab, FOLFIRI, bevacizumab, first-line therapy, progression-free survival, overall survival, objective response rate, predictive biomarkers, CRYSTAL trial, FIRE-3 trial, EGFR inhibition

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review