PURPOSE: The study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOXs) in patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: Five databases were searched up to June 2014, without language restrictions. The outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-six eligible trials were selected from 178 studies that initially were identified. All trials were published in Chinese journals between 2005 and 2014 and included 1585 patients (787 in XELOX group and 798 in FOLFOXs group). The pooled results failed to show statistical significance of XELOX regimen on ORR (OR 1.18, 95% CIs 1.00-1.41, P = 0.057) and CBR (OR 1.10, 95% CIs 0.95-1.28, P = 0.191) as compared with FOLFOXs regimen. None of the 26 clinical trials reported progression-free survival, and only one reported overall survival rate. The meta-analysis demonstrated that XELOX regimen was associated with a significant lower risk with nausea, stomatitis, diarrhea and alopecia, and a significant higher risk of hand-foot syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is limited to suggest that XELOX may share similar efficacy as FOLFOXs and reduce toxicities of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer therapy. However, owing to limited data and potential bias of the included studies, further rigorously controlled trials are required.
PURPOSE: The study aims to compare the efficacy and safety of capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) with 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus oxaliplatin (FOLFOXs) in patients with advanced gastric cancer. METHODS: Five databases were searched up to June 2014, without language restrictions. The outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), clinical benefit rate (CBR), and toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-six eligible trials were selected from 178 studies that initially were identified. All trials were published in Chinese journals between 2005 and 2014 and included 1585 patients (787 in XELOX group and 798 in FOLFOXs group). The pooled results failed to show statistical significance of XELOX regimen on ORR (OR 1.18, 95% CIs 1.00-1.41, P = 0.057) and CBR (OR 1.10, 95% CIs 0.95-1.28, P = 0.191) as compared with FOLFOXs regimen. None of the 26 clinical trials reported progression-free survival, and only one reported overall survival rate. The meta-analysis demonstrated that XELOX regimen was associated with a significant lower risk with nausea, stomatitis, diarrhea and alopecia, and a significant higher risk of hand-foot syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: The evidence is limited to suggest that XELOX may share similar efficacy as FOLFOXs and reduce toxicities of chemotherapy in advanced gastric cancer therapy. However, owing to limited data and potential bias of the included studies, further rigorously controlled trials are required.
Authors: Jonathan A C Sterne; Alex J Sutton; John P A Ioannidis; Norma Terrin; David R Jones; Joseph Lau; James Carpenter; Gerta Rücker; Roger M Harbord; Christopher H Schmid; Jennifer Tetzlaff; Jonathan J Deeks; Jaime Peters; Petra Macaskill; Guido Schwarzer; Sue Duval; Douglas G Altman; David Moher; Julian P T Higgins Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-07-22
Authors: J Cassidy; C Twelves; E Van Cutsem; P Hoff; E Bajetta; M Boyer; R Bugat; U Burger; A Garin; U Graeven; J McKendric; J Maroun; J Marshall; B Osterwalder; G Pérez-Manga; R Rosso; P Rougier; R L Schilsky Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2002-04 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Y-K Kang; W-K Kang; D-B Shin; J Chen; J Xiong; J Wang; M Lichinitser; Z Guan; R Khasanov; L Zheng; M Philco-Salas; T Suarez; J Santamaria; G Forster; P I McCloud Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2009-01-19 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Fernando Rivera; C Romero; P Jimenez-Fonseca; M Izquierdo-Manuel; A Salud; E Martínez; M Jorge; V Arrazubi; J C Méndez; P García-Alfonso; M Reboredo; J Barriuso; N Muñoz-Unceta; R Jimeno; C López Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 3.333