SynthesisTumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine2014
S-1-based therapy versus S-1 monotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 2 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Management of advanced gastric cancer: An overview of major findings from meta-analysis.Oncotarget · 2016Pooled it
- The efficacy and safety of S-1-based regimens in the first-line treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Gastric cancer : official journal of the International Gastric Cancer Association and the Japanese Gastric Cancer Association · 2016Pooled it
- Article
- A meta-analysis of safety and efficacy on first-line S-1 therapy in cancer patients.Translational lung cancer research · 2015Article
- Letter regarding Wu JR et al.: S-1-based therapy versus S-1 monotherapy in advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to derive a more precise estimate of the prognostic significance of S-1-based therapy over S-1 monotherapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC), including overall survival (OS) time, progression-free survival (PFS) time, objective response rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Studies stratifying OS, PFS, ORR, and AEs in AGC patients in an S-1-based therapy versus an S-1 monotherapy setting were eligible for analysis by systematic computerized PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library searches. Data from these studies were pooled using STATA package version 11.0. Six studies that investigated outcomes in a total of 913 AGC cases, of which 443 (48.5%) received S-1-based therapy and 470 (51.5%) received S-1 monotherapy, were included in the meta-analysis. Median OS and median PFS were significantly prolonged in AGC patients receiving S-1-based therapy compared with those receiving S-1 monotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] 0.83, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.71-0.96, P = 0.015, and HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.60-0.80, P = 0.000, respectively). The ORR favored patients with S-1-based therapy (OR 1.65, 95% CI 1.34-2.06, P = 0.000). Higher incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia was found in patients with S-1-based therapy (P = 0.000). For the Asian population, S-1-based therapy significantly improved OS and PFS and enhanced ORR in comparison to S-1 monotherapy. The safety profile was poorer in patients with S-1-based therapy, but could be considerable between the S-1-based therapy and S-1 monotherapy group. Our conclusion needs to be confirmed via high-quality trials and the results need to be reproduced in other regions and populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
24390661What 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.