Loading
Colorectal Cancer Treatments and Studies / Colorectal Cancer Surgical Treatments / Gastric Cancer Management and Outcomes · Journal article
Cerrahpasa Medical Journal · August 14, 2026
Early or partial results. Treat as a signal, not a conclusion.
This single-center retrospective cohort of 37 RAS wild-type mCRC patients reports median OS of 56.9 months with maintenance anti-EGFR therapy versus 9.6 months with surveillance (P=0.041), but PFS difference was not significant (11.4 vs 5.4 months, P=0.133). The authors explicitly caution that the OS finding must be interpreted cautiously due to limited sample size, retrospective design, selection bias, and potential confounding by subsequent therapies, and call for prospective confirmation.
Single-center retrospective cohort study. RAS wild-type patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who achieved disease control after first-line chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR therapy, followed at a single center.. Intervention: Anti-EGFR–based maintenance therapy administered after first-line chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR treatment. Compared with: Active surveillance (no maintenance therapy). n = 37. Single center (location not specified).
Median OS 56.9 months in maintenance group vs 9.6 months in surveillance group (P=0.041) Median PFS 11.4 months in maintenance group vs 5.4 months in surveillance group (P=0.133, not significant) Higher rates of transition to subsequent lines of therapy in maintenance group
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
While the OS difference appears substantial, clinicians should note the authors' explicit caution that this is a small retrospective study with acknowledged selection bias and confounding by subsequent treatments. The non-significant PFS result undermines confidence in the maintenance strategy pending prospective data.
Single-center retrospective study with modest sample size (n=37), selection bias acknowledged by authors, and OS finding not matched by PFS significance; needs prospective confirmation.
As stated by the source record.
Quoted from the source exactly as published.
While the OS difference appears substantial, clinicians should note the authors' explicit caution that this is a small retrospective study with acknowledged selection bias and confounding by subsequent treatments. The non-significant PFS result undermines confidence in the maintenance strategy pending prospective data.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (anti-EGFR)–based maintenance therapy administered after first-line chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR treatment on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in patients with RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), using real-world data. Methods: Patients followed at a single center between 2015 and 2025 were retrospectively analyzed. A total of 37 RAS wild-type patients who achieved disease control after first-line chemotherapy combined with anti-EGFR therapy were included. Patients were divided into a maintenance therapy group (n = 19) and an active surveillance group (n = 18). Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan–Meier method, groups were compared using the log-rank test, and a landmark approach was applied to minimize immortal time bias. Results: At a median follow-up of 27.4 months, median PFS was 11.4 months in the maintenance group and 5.4 months in the surveillance group, without reaching statistical significance (P =.133). In contrast, median OS was significantly longer in the maintenance group (56.9 months vs. 9.6 months; P =.041). Additionally, higher rates of transition to subsequent lines of therapy were observed in patients receiving maintenance therapy. Conclusion: Anti-EGFR–based maintenance therapy was associated with numerically prolonged PFS and improved treatment continuity in patients with RAS wild-type mCRC. Although a significant difference in OS was observed, this finding should be interpreted cautiously given the limited sample size, retrospective design, and potential influence of selection bias and subsequent therapies. Larger prospective studies are warranted to better define the role of anti-EGFR maintenance therapy in clinical practice. Cite this article as: Çokgezer S, Artan S, Topuz S, et al. Effect of maintenance anti-EGFR therapy on survival in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer: real-world data. Cerrahpaşa Med J 2026, 50, 0069, doi: 10.5152/cjm.2026.26069.
Taken from the source record, never inferred. Follow any of these and new work involving them reaches your briefing.