To the Editor In a systematic review and network meta-analysis, Sonbol and colleagues1 found that maintenance therapy was significantly associated with progression-free survival (PFS) but not overall survival (OS) compared with observation following first-line induction therapy for metastatic colorectal cancer. Additionally, all 3 maintenance strategies (fluoropyrimidine, bevacizumab, and fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab) significantly improved PFS but not OS compared with observation, whereas fluoropyrimidine and fluoropyrimidine plus bevacizumab ranked higher than bevacizumab in PFS and OS. However, we have some concerns regarding the methodological aspects of this work.
Identify all potential conflicts of interest that might be relevant to your comment.
Conflicts of interest comprise financial interests, activities, and relationships within the past 3 years including but not limited to employment, affiliation, grants or funding, consultancies, honoraria or payment, speaker's bureaus, stock ownership or options, expert testimony, royalties, donation of medical equipment, or patents planned, pending, or issued.
Err on the side of full disclosure.
If you have no conflicts of interest, check "No potential conflicts of interest" in the box below. The information will be posted with your response.
Not all submitted comments are published. Please see our commenting policy for details.
Wang Z, Liang F, Xu R. The Role of Maintenance Therapy in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. JAMA Oncol. Published online April 16, 2020. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2020.0580
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: