Comparison of capecitabine and tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1) in the treatment of advanced breast carcinoma in the elderly

Zheng, Dongxing; Jin, Jihai; Liu, Yujuan

doi:10.4314/tjpr.v17i3.22

Cited by 1 publication

(1 citation statement)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior clinical studies have suggested that 5-FU prodrugs containing dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitors such as S-1 or uracil/tegafur can reduce the incidence of HFS[17]. In this study, HFS was significantly less common in the S-1 group than in the capecitabine group, consistent with previous studies[18,19]. Although HFS is not life-threatening, it can significantly impair a patient’s daily activities and decrease their quality of life.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Oral chemotherapy for second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

Park

Kim

Shin

et al. 2019

WJGO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDThere is no standard therapy for second-line treatment of gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer patients with poor performance status. A combination of chemotherapy drugs 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), leucovorin, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) or 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus nanoliposomal irinotecan can be considered as second-line treatment for such patients; however, due to toxicity, none of the regimens are recommended for patients with poor performance. Capecitabine or S-1 has relatively low toxicity and can be considered a treatment option for gemcitabine-refractory pancreatic cancer.AIMTo investigate the efficacy and toxicity of oral chemotherapy as second-line treatment in patients with pancreatic cancer.METHODSPatients who had progressive disease after first-line gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were retrospectively analyzed between January 2011 and December 2018. They were treated with capecitabine or S-1 as the second-line treatment. Capecitabine was administered as a 2500 mg/m2 divided dose on days 1-14, followed by a 1-wk rest. S-1 was taken orally based on the patient’s body surface area for 28 d, followed by 2-wk of rest. Progression-free survival and overall survival were used to compare efficacy of capecitabine and S-1.RESULTSOf the 81 patients, 41 were treated with capecitabine and 40 with S-1. The median time to treatment failure in both groups was 1.5 mo (P = 0.425). The objective response rate was similar in the two groups: 9.8% with capecitabine and 2.5% with S-1 (P = 0.359). Median progression-free survival was longer in the S-1 group than in the capecitabine group (S-1 2.7 mo, capecitabine 2.0 mo, P = 0.003). There was no significant difference in the median overall survival between the capecitabine and S-1 groups (4.3 mo vs 5.0 mo, P = 0.092). Grade 3 or 4 hand-foot syndrome was significantly more common in the capecitabine group than in the S-1 group (14.6% vs 0%, P = 0.026).CONCLUSIONCapecitabine or S-1 can be used as a second-line treatment for patients with advanced pancreatic cancer with poor performance status after progression to a gemcitabine-based regimen.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Oral chemotherapy for second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

Park

Kim

Shin

et al. 2019

WJGO

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Comparison of capecitabine and tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1) in the treatment of advanced breast carcinoma in the elderly

Abstract: Purpose: To analyse and compare the clinical effects and safety of capecitabine and tegafur/gimeracil/oteracil (S-1)

Cited by 1 publication

References 7 publications

Oral chemotherapy for second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

Oral chemotherapy for second-line treatment in patients with gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About