CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 734Colorectal Cancer Treatments and StudiesLung Cancer Treatments and MutationsGenetic factors in colorectal cancer

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 12 of the 12 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Clinical relevance of KRAS mutation detection in metastatic colorectal cancer treated by Cetuximab plus chemotherapy

Open access
Di Fiore, F, Blanchard, F, Charbonnier, F, Le Pessot, F, Lamy, A, Galais, M P, Bastit, L, Killian, A, Sesboüé, R, Tuech, J J, Queuniet, A M, Paillot, B, Sabourin, J C, Michot, F, Michel, P, Frebourg, T·2007·British Journal of Cancer
DOI 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603685PMC PMC2360149
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The predictive value of KRAS mutation in metastatic colorectal cancer (MCRC) patients treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy has recently been suggested. In our study, 59 patients with a chemotherapy-refractory MCRC treated with cetuximab plus chemotherapy were included and clinical response was evaluated according to response evaluation criteria in solid tumours (RECIST). Tumours were screened for KRAS mutations using first direct sequencing, then two sensitive methods based on SNaPshot and PCR-ligase chain reaction (LCR) assays. Clinical response was evaluated according to gene mutations using the Fisher exact test. Times to progression (TTP) were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method and compared with log-rank test. A KRAS mutation was detected in 22 out of 59 tumours and, in six cases, was missed by sequencing analysis but detected using the SNaPshot and PCR-LCR assays. Remarkably, no KRAS mutation was found in the 12 patients with clinical response. KRAS mutation was associated with disease progression (P=0.0005) and TTP was significantly decreased in mutated KRAS patients (3 vs 5.5 months, P=0.015). Our study confirms that KRAS mutation is highly predictive of a non-response to cetuximab plus chemotherapy in MCRC and highlights the need to use sensitive molecular methods, such as SNaPshot or PCR-LCR assays, to ensure an efficient mutation detection.

Overview

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 · 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603685

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Figures

Figure 1 Detection by SNaPShot and PCR-LCR assays of KRAS mutations not detected by direct sequencing. Direct sequencing of KRAS exon 2 from control DNA and tumour 12292. The black arrow indicates the nucleotide c.35 (A). SNaPShot detection of the c.35G>T (p.G12V) mutation in tumour 12292. Each peak corresponds to a specific extended primer. The red arrows indicates the peak specific of the c.35G>T mutation (B). PCR-LCR analysis of tumour 12292, using a dye-labelled primer specific for the mutant c.35G>C (p.G12A) or c.35G>T (p.G12V) KRAS allele. The arrow indicates the peak specific of the c.35G>T mutation (C). Note that the c.35G>T mutation detected by both the SNaPShot and PCR-LCR assays cannot be clearly detected by sequencing analysis alone.
Figure 1 Detection by SNaPShot and PCR-LCR assays of KRAS mutations not detected by direct sequencing. Direct sequencing of KRAS exon 2 from control DNA and tumour 12292. The black arrow indicates the nucleotide c.35 (A). SNaPShot detection of the c.35G>T (p.G12V) mutation in tumour 12292. Each peak corresponds to a specific extended primer. The red arrows indicates the peak specific of the c.35G>T mutation (B). PCR-LCR analysis of tumour 12292, using a dye-labelled primer specific for the mutant c.35G>C (p.G12A) or c.35G>T (p.G12V) KRAS allele. The arrow indicates the peak specific of the c.35G>T mutation (C). Note that the c.35G>T mutation detected by both the SNaPShot and PCR-LCR assays cannot be clearly detected by sequencing analysis alone.CC BY · PubMed Central

Verification

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.

Citations

Cites

Show all 12 references

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 701–734 of 734

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Di Fiore, F., Blanchard, F., Charbonnier, F., Le Pessot, F., Lamy, A., Galais, M. P., Bastit, L., Killian, A., Sesboüé, R., Tuech, J. J., Queuniet, A. M., Paillot, B., Sabourin, J. C., Michot, F., Michel, P., & Frebourg, T.
Affiliations
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Rouen (FR)
  • Inserm (FR)
  • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Caen Normandie (FR)
ORCID
Venue
British Journal of Cancer
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2007-03-20
Volume
96
Issue
8
Pages
1166-1169
ISSN
  • 0007-0920 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-1827
DOI
10.1038/sj.bjc.6603685
PMC
PMC2360149
OpenAlex
W1999250974
Cited by
734
References
12
Citations by year
2025: 6 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 21 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 33 · 2014: 54 · 2013: 52 · 2012: 62
FWCI
51.47
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • British Journal of Cancer (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc-sa)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Institut National Du Cancer
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Lung Cancer Treatments and Mutations
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Genetic factors in colorectal cancer
Keywords
KRAS mutation, metastatic colorectal cancer, cetuximab, anti-EGFR therapy, predictive biomarkers, chemotherapy-refractory cancer, SNaPshot assay, mutation detection sensitivity, time to progression, clinical response
MeSH terms
Cetuximab, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols, Humans, Mutation, Neoplasm Metastasis, Genes, ras, Colorectal Neoplasms, Polymerase Chain Reaction, Antibodies, Monoclonal, Humanized, ErbB Receptors

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