Trial reportWorld journal of gastroenterology2011
Paclitaxel based vs oxaliplatin based regimens for advanced gastric cancer.
Trial report in World journal of gastroenterology, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- A Bayesian Network Meta-Analysis for Identifying the Optimal Taxane-Based Chemotherapy Regimens for Treating Gastric Cancer.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2019Pooled it
- Palliative chemotherapy and targeted therapies for esophageal and gastroesophageal junction cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017Pooled it
- Optimal first-line chemotherapeutic treatment in patients with locally advanced or metastatic esophagogastric carcinoma: triplet versus doublet chemotherapy: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis.Cancer metastasis reviews · 2015Pooled it
- Randomized phase II study comparing paclitaxel with S-1 vs. S-1 as first-line treatment in patients with advanced gastric cancer.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2013Trial
- Natural product Erianin: mitigating FOLFOX toxicity and enhancing against colorectal cancer.Frontiers in chemistry · 2025Article
- Application and progress of palliative therapy in advanced gastric carcinomas.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Review
- Ototoxicity and Platinum Uptake Following Cyclic Administration of Platinum-Based Chemotherapeutic Agents.Journal of the Association for Research in Otolaryngology : JARO · 2020Article
- Role of Toll-like receptor 4 in drug-drug interaction between paclitaxel and irinotecan in vitro.Toxicology in vitro : an international journal published in association with BIBRA · 2017Article
- Superior antitumor activity of nanoparticle albumin-bound paclitaxel in experimental gastric cancer.PloS one · 2013Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimTo compare the efficacy and safety of paclitaxel combined with fluorouracil plus cisplatin (PCF), and oxaliplatin combined with fluorouracil plus leucovorin (FOLFOX-4) regimens for advanced gastric cancer (AGC).
methodsNinety-four patients with AGC were randomly assigned to receive paclitaxel (50 mg/m(2) iv) on days 1, 8 and 15, cisplatin (20 mg/m(2) iv) and fluorouracil (750 mg/m(2) iv) on days 1-5, or oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2) iv) and leucovorin (200 mg/m(2) iv) on day 1, followed by bolus fluorouracil (400 mg/m(2) iv) and fluorouracil (600 mg/m(2) iv) on days 1 and 2. The primary end point was the 1-year survival time.
resultsThe overall response rate (ORR) of the patients was 48.0% and 45.5% to PCF and FOLFOX-4, respectively. The disease control rate (DCR) of PCF and FOLFOX-4 was 82.0% and 81.8%, respectively. The median survival times (MSTs) of the patients were 10.8 and 9.9 mo, respectively, after treatment with PCF and FOLFOX-4. The 1-year survival rate of the patients was 36.0% and 34.1%, respectively, after treatment with PCF and FOLFOX-4. No significant difference was observed in ORR, DCR, MST or 1-year survival rate between the two groups. The most common adverse events were anemia, nausea and vomiting, and grade 3/4 alopecia in PCF treatment group, and anemia, grade 1/2 neurotoxic effect and grade 3/4 neutropenia in FOLFOX-4 treatment group.
conclusionPatients with AGC have a similar response rate to PCF and FOLFOX-4 regimens with a similar survival rate. The PCF and FOLFOX-4 regimens are efficacious and tolerable as a promising therapy for AGC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.