SynthesisFrontiers in oncology2026
Efficacy and safety of 3-month versus 6-month oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The optimal duration of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II-III colorectal cancer (CRC) remains uncertain. Although a 3-month regimen may reduce toxicity, particularly peripheral sensory neuropathy (PSN), its effect on long-term survival is unclear. This study systematically compared the efficacy and safety of 3 versus 6 months of oxaliplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III CRC patients. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 3 months versus 6 months FOLFOX or CAPOX adjuvant chemotherapy in stage II-III CRC patients. Outcomes included disease-free survival (DFS), 3-year DFS rate, overall survival (OS), chemotherapy completion rate, and PSN. The certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE approach, and trial sequential analysis (TSA) was performed to assess the robustness of the results. Results: Six RCTs involving a total of 16,420 stage II-III CRC patients were included. In the overall patients, the 3-month regimen showed no significant difference in DFS compared with the 6-month regimen (HR = 1.05, 95% CI 0.98-1.13, P = 0.18). Within the FOLFOX subgroup, the risk of DFS events was increased in the 3-month regimen (HR = 1.21, 95% CI 1.11-1.33, P < 0.001), with a similar difference observed among stage III patients (HR = 1.23, 95% CI 1.06-1.43, P = 0.007). No significant differences were observed in OS or 3-year OS rate, and all subgroup analyses showed no statistically significant differences in 3-year DFS rates. The 3-month regimen demonstrated a significantly higher chemotherapy completion rate, and grade 3-4 PSN was significantly lower in the 3 months regimen. Conclusion: Stage II patients may preferentially receive a 3-month treatment regimen, whereas stage III patients receiving FOLFOX should still consider a 6-month regimen. Systematic Review Registration: https://inplasy.com/inplasy-2025-12-0022/, identifier INPLASY-2025-12-0022.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.