Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based versus S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer: a propensity score matched single-center comparison.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Fluoropyrimidine-based regimens are the cornerstone of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer (GC). Capecitabine or S-1 might be used as an alternative to infusional 5-fluorouracil, especially in pan-Asian. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based and S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in Chinese patients with unresectable or metastatic GC.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective study including unresectable or metastatic GC patients treated with the capecitabine-based or S-1-based regimen as first-line chemotherapy at the First Hospital of China Medical University. Propensity score matching (PSM) analysis was performed to reduce selection bias. Overall survival (OS) outcomes were compared using the Kaplan-Meier method and log-rank test. Prognostic significance was determined using multivariate Cox regression analysis. In addition, subgroup analyses were conducted to determine the effectiveness of capecitabine-based and S-1-based regimens in clinically relevant patient subsets.

Results

The clinical data of 469 patients included between October 2005 and September 2018. PSM analysis identified 187 patients receiving capecitabine-based or S-1-based regimen. No significant difference in OS (10.7 vs. 11.1 months, P=0.523) was detected between the two groups after PSM. In the subgroup analysis, the median OS (12.2 vs. 9.3 months, P=0.013) was longer for patients with peritoneum metastasis who received the capecitabine-based regimen compared to those who received the S-1-based regimen.

Conclusions

No significant difference in clinical outcomes was observed between the capecitabine and S-1-based regimen as first-line chemotherapy for metastatic or unresectable GC patients in China. The capecitabine-based regimen should be considered in the treatment of the GC patients with peritoneum metastasis.

SUBMITTER: Wang J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7475324 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based versus S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer: a propensity score matched single-center comparison.

Wang Jin J Li Zhi Z Qu Jinglei J Song Na N Chen Ying Y Cheng Yu Y Zhang Simeng S Qu Xiujuan X Liu Yunpeng Y

Journal of gastrointestinal oncology 20200801 4

<h4>Background</h4>Fluoropyrimidine-based regimens are the cornerstone of first-line chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer (GC). Capecitabine or S-1 might be used as an alternative to infusional 5-fluorouracil, especially in pan-Asian. This study aimed to compare the clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based and S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in Chinese patients with unresectable or metastatic GC.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a retrospective study including unresectable or metas ...[more]

PMID: 32953151

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe primary aim of this study was to compare survival from neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy plus surgery (NCRS) versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy plus surgery (NCS) for the treatment of esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. The secondary aims were to compare pathological effects, short-term mortality and morbidity, and to evaluate the effect of lymph node harvest upon survival in both treatment groups.MethodsData were collected from 10 European centers from 2001 to 2012. Six hundred and eight patients with stage II or III oesophageal or oesophago-gastric junctional adenocarcinoma were included; 301 in the NCRS group and 307 in the NCS group. Propensity score matching and Cox regression analyses were used to compensate for differences in baseline characteristics.ResultsNCRS resulted in significant pathological benefits with more ypT0 (26.7% versus 5%; P < 0.001), more ypN0 (63.3% versus 32.1%; P < 0.001), and reduced R1/2 resection margins (7.7% versus 21.8%; P < 0.001). Analysis of short-term outcomes showed no statistically significant differences in 30-day or 90-day mortality, but increased incidence of anastomotic leak (23.1% versus 6.8%; P < 0.001) in NCRS patients. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups in 3-year overall survival (57.9% versus 53.4%; Hazard Ratio (HR)= 0.89, 95%C.I. 0.67-1.17, P = 0.391) nor disease-free survival (52.9% versus 48.9%; HR = 0.90, 95%C.I. 0.69-1.18, P = 0.443). The pattern of recurrence was also similar (P = 0.660). There was a higher lymph node harvest in the NCS group (27 versus 14; P < 0.001), which was significantly associated with a lower recurrence rate and improved disease free survival within the NCS group.ConclusionThe survival differences between NCRS and NCS maybe modest, if present at all, for the treatment of locally advanced esophageal or junctional adenocarcinoma. Future large-scale randomized trials must control and monitor indicators of the quality of surgery, as the extent of lymphadenectomy appears to influence prognosis in patients treated with NCS, from this large multi-center European study.

Project description:BackgroundDistant metastasis has been the main failure pattern for locoregionally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) patients, and intensified neoadjuvant chemotherapy has become a popular research topic. The present study aimed to compare the survival outcomes, acute toxicities and surgical complications in LARC patients who received preoperative chemoradiotherapy with triweekly oxaliplatin and capecitabine (triweekly XELOX) or capecitabine.MethodsBetween 2007 and 2017, patients with clinically staged II-III rectal cancer who were treated with preoperative chemoradiotherapy using either triweekly XELOX (oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 plus capecitabine 825 mg/m2) or capecitabine were included. Variables potentially influencing chemotherapy treatment selection were used to generate propensity scores (PS). The association between chemotherapy regimens and survival endpoints, including distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS), were evaluated and adjusted with PS. The acute toxicities and surgical complications were also compared.ResultsA total of 810 patients were included in the analysis; 277 (34.2%) patients received triweekly XELOX, and 533 (65.8%) received capecitabine. The pathological complete response (pCR) rates were 20.2 and 19.9% (P = 0.912) for the groups treated with triweekly XELOX and capecitabine, respectively. The 5-year DMFS, OS and DFS with triweekly XELOX versus capecitabine were 75.6% vs. 77.6% (P = 0.555), 79.2% vs. 83.3% (P = 0.101), and 69.9% vs. 73.7% (P = 0.283), respectively. Triweekly XELOX was not associated with an increased risk of severe toxicity during chemoradiotherapy, but it increased the risk of postoperative complications compared to capecitabine. After PS adjustment, the differences between the two groups remained insignificant in pCR rate, survival outcomes, and acute toxicities, and the difference in surgical complications disappeared.ConclusionsTriweekly XELOX or capecitabine concurrent with neoadjuvant radiotherapy leads to similar long-term survival outcomes, acute toxicities and surgical complications in LARC patients.

Project description:ObjectiveUnresectable colorectal cancer liver metastasis (CRLM) remains a challenging obstacle that often prevents curative treatment. In this study, we retrospectively analyzed the efficacy and safety of high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) as a local adjuvant therapy for systemic chemotherapy for patients with unresectable CRLM. HIFU is a noninvasive method previously demonstrated as efficacious for various solid malignancies.MethodsPropensity score matching was used for the combination therapy group (HIFU group, n = 59) and the observation group receiving systemic therapy only (No-HIFU group, n = 59). In addition, the survival benefit, adverse effects, and factors affecting prognosis following HIFU were evaluated.ResultsThe disease control rate was 77.9% and 62.7%, and the objective remission rate was 18.9% and 6.8% in the HIFU and non-HIFU groups, respectively. The survival analysis showed that median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 12.0 months and 11.0 months for the HIFU and non-HIFU groups, respectively (p = 0.002). The univariate and multivariate analysis showed that pre-treatment colorectal cancer liver metastasis lesion size was significantly associated with mPFS. In addition, patients that received a combination treatment for CRLM lesions <5.0 cm had a longer mPFS when compared to those receiving systemic therapy alone (13.0 months vs. 11.0 months, p = 0.001). In the HIFU group, patients with lesions <5.0 cm had a longer mPFS than patients with lesions ≥5.0 cm (13.0 months vs. 10.0 months, p = 0.04) (Figure 3B,C). Most treatment-related adverse events observed in both groups were grade 1-2. Only four cases (6.8%) of grade 1-2 skin burns were observed in patients in the HIFU group; no other statistically significant adverse events were observed.ConclusionsOur study showed that HIFU ablation targeting unresectable CRLM alongside systemic therapy safely and significantly improved local control rates and prolonged mPFS, especially for lesions smaller than 5.0 cm.

Dataset Information

Clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based versus S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer: a propensity score matched single-center comparison.

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

Clinical outcomes of capecitabine-based versus S-1-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastric cancer: a propensity score matched single-center comparison.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets