PETACC-3 subpopulation of patients stratified by the 5-FU profile score, RFS.

<p>Same data as in <a href="http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0155123#pone.0155123.g001" target="_blank">Fig 1A</a>, but presenting the results per treatment arm. Panel A shows the data of the patients in the 5-FU/FA arm, Panel B the data for the patients in the FOLFIRI treatment arm. The used endpoint is RFS.</p

Patients from the Kennedy cohort stratified by the 5-FU profile score.

<p>Patients with a 5-FU profile score smaller or equal to 50 were labeled as low score, the other ones as high score in relation to 5-FU treatment. The curves show that the 5-FU profile does not separate the CC patients into good and poor outcome (using RFS as endpoint in panel A, OS in panel B).</p

Association between RFS and the 5-FU profile score in the subpopulation of the PETACC-3 study.

<p>Association between RFS and the 5-FU profile score in the subpopulation of the PETACC-3 study.</p

PETACC-3 subpopulation of patients stratified by the 5-FU profile score.

<p>Patients with a 5-FU profile score smaller or equal to 50 were labeled as poor prognosis, the other ones as good prognosis in relation to 5-FU treatment. 5-FU was included in all patients' treatment. The curves show that the 5-FU profile significantly separates the patients into good and poor outcome (using RFS as endpoint in panel A, OS in panel B).</p