高级检索
当前位置: 首页 > 详情页

Concurrent radiotherapy with oral fluoropyrimidine versus gemcitabine in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

文献详情

资源类型:
WOS体系:
Pubmed体系:

收录情况: ◇ SCIE

机构: [1]Department of Radiation Oncology, Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, People’s Republic of China [2]Department of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, People’s Republic of China
出处:
ISSN:

关键词: pancreatic cancer chemoradiotherapy oral fluoropyrimidine gemcitabine meta-analysis

摘要:
Background: Gemcitabine (GEM) is the most widely utilized systemic agent in combination with radiation therapy (RT) for treating locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) in the concurrent setting. Despite recent interest in using two novel oral fluoropyrimidines (FUs), capecitabine and S-1, in this setting, there is a lack of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to support this approach. Methods: Trials published between 1994 and 2014 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library). All prospective studies were independently identified by two authors for inclusion. Demographic data, treatment response, objective response rate (ORR), progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively), and toxicities were extracted and analyzed using comprehensive meta-analysis software (version 2.0). Results: Twenty-three cohorts with 843 patients were included: 497 patients were treated with GEM and 346 patients were treated with oral FU. Pooled OS was significantly higher at 1 and 2years for S-1 plus RT than for GEM plus RT (relative risk [RR] 1.27; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.00-1.65; P=0.03; and RR 1.75; 95% CI, 1.18-2.60, P=0.002, respectively), while 1-year PFS and ORR were not significantly different between S-1 and GEM-based chemoradiotherapy (P=0.37 and P=0.06, respectively). Additionally, comparable efficacy was found between capecitabine and GEM-based chemoradiotherapy in terms of OS, PFS, and ORR. As for grade 3 and 4 acute toxicity, oral FU plus RT significantly reduced the risk of developing hematologic toxicities, nausea, and vomiting when compared to GEM plus RT (P<0.001). Conclusions: Oral FU plus RT may be a safe and feasible regimen for patients with LAPC, with similar efficacy and low rate of toxicities compared with GEM plus RT. Our findings support the need to compare S-1 with GEM in the concurrent setting in large prospective RCTs due to its potential survival benefits.

语种:
被引次数:
WOS:
PubmedID:
中科院分区:
出版当年[2015]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 生物工程与应用微生物 4 区 肿瘤学
最新[2025]版:
大类 | 4 区 医学
小类 | 4 区 生物工程与应用微生物 4 区 肿瘤学
JCR分区:
出版当年[2015]版:
Q2 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY Q3 ONCOLOGY
最新[2023]版:
Q3 BIOTECHNOLOGY & APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY Q3 ONCOLOGY

影响因子: 最新[2023版] 最新五年平均 出版当年[2015版] 出版当年五年平均 出版前一年[2014版] 出版后一年[2016版]

第一作者:
第一作者机构: [1]Department of Radiation Oncology, Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, People’s Republic of China
通讯作者:
通讯机构: [2]Department of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, People’s Republic of China [*1]Department of Radiation Oncology, Fourth Hospital of Hebei Medical University, No 12 Jiankang Road, Shijiazhuang, Hebei Province, 050011, People’s Republic of China
推荐引用方式(GB/T 7714):
APA:
MLA:

资源点击量:39770 今日访问量:0 总访问量:1333 更新日期:2025-05-01 建议使用谷歌、火狐浏览器 常见问题

版权所有©2020 河北医科大学第四医院 技术支持:重庆聚合科技有限公司 地址:河北省石家庄市健康路12号