{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025273224043715847, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006147540983606557, 'mean_word_length': 5.751152073732719, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Comparison Between Biweekly and Weekly Cetuximab in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Meta-analysis

Background/Aim: Although weekly administration of cetuximab is the standard regimen in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), the efficacy and safety of a biweekly regimen is a pending issue. We conducted this meta-analysis to compare the efficacy and safety of a biweekly vs. a weekly regimen of cetuximab in the treatment of mCRC. Patients and Methods: We conducted a comprehensive electronic literature search up to January 2020 to identify studies directly comparing the efficacy and safety of biweekly cetuximab administration and conventional weekly administration in patients with mCRC. We then performed a meta-analysis using random-effects models to calculate risk ratios and mean differences with 95% confidence intervals. Results: Four studies with a total of 381 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The meta-analysis showed that biweekly administration conferred equivalent efficacy, including objective response rate, disease-control rate, progression-free survival, and overall survival, as well as safety, including skin toxicity, gastrointestinal toxicity, and hematologic toxicity, compared with weekly administration in patients with mCRC. Conclusion: Results from this meta-analysis support the administration of biweekly instead of weekly cetuximab, which is beneficial for both patients and health resources.