28
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Capecitabine/cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer: a randomised phase III noninferiority trial

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          To compare capecitabine/cisplatin with 5-fluorouracil/cisplatin as first-line treatment for advanced gastric cancer (AGC). In this randomised, open-label, phase III study, patients received cisplatin (80 mg/m(2) i.v. day 1) plus oral capecitabine (1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d., days 1-14) (XP) or 5-FU (800 mg/m(2)/day by continuous infusion, days 1-5) (FP) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was to confirm noninferiority of XP versus FP for progression-free survival (PFS). A total of 316 patients were randomised to XP (n = 160) or FP (n = 156). In the per-protocol population, median PFS for XP (n = 139) versus FP (n = 137) was 5.6 versus 5.0 months. The primary end point was met with an unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 0.81 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.63-1.04, P < 0.001 versus noninferiority margin of 1.25]. Median overall survival was 10.5 versus 9.3 months for XP versus FP (unadjusted HR = 0.85, 95% CI 0.64-1.13, P = 0.008 versus noninferiority margin of 1.25). The most common treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events in XP versus FP patients were as follows: neutropenia (16% versus 19%), vomiting (7% versus 8%), and stomatitis (2% versus 6%). XP showed significant noninferiority for PFS versus FP in the first-line treatment of AGC. XP can be considered an effective alternative to FP.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          Annals of Oncology
          Annals of Oncology
          Oxford University Press (OUP)
          09237534
          April 2009
          April 2009
          : 20
          : 4
          : 666-673
          Article
          10.1093/annonc/mdn717
          19153121
          68355a57-afa0-4828-b827-2d9c2b445808
          © 2009

          https://www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/

          http://www.elsevier.com/open-access/userlicense/1.0/

          History

          Comments

          Comment on this article