ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal cancer2014
Retrospective comparison of CAPOX and FOLFOX dose intensity, toxicity, and clinical outcomes in the treatment of metastatic colon cancer.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Anticancer effects of Commiphora myrrha extract on colorectal cancer through regulation of metastasis, cell cycle progression, and apoptosis in vitro and in vivo.Medical oncology (Northwood, London, England) · 2025Article
- CAPOX vs. FOLFOX for Colorectal Cancer-Real World Outcomes in Ontario, Canada.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Advances and new frontiers for immunotherapy in colorectal cancer: Setting the stage for neoadjuvant success?Molecular therapy oncolytics · 2021Review
- Is there an efficacy-effectiveness gap between randomized controlled trials and real-world studies in colorectal cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Translational cancer research · 2020Article
- Recent developments in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer.Therapeutic advances in medical oncology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe treatment of metastatic colon cancer (mCC) utilizes either combination therapies or sequential monotherapy followed by combination therapy in subsequent lines of treatment. Patients often receive therapy consisting of oxaliplatin with intravenous 5-fluoruacil (5-FU) (FOLFOX) or oral capecitabine (CAPOX). A retrospective analysis was performed comparing median dose intensity (MDI), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and toxicity profiles of these two regimens in mCC.
methodsOne hundred twenty-two mCC patients (pts) received either FOLFOX6 (n = 46) or CAPOX (n = 76). Age, gender, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status at diagnosis were balanced between groups. MDI was compared by calculating a percent of target dose achieved in the average cycle for each patient and taking the median of this value.
resultsOxaliplatin MDI trended towards being lower in those treated with CAPOX compared to FOLFOX (87.5 vs 93 %, p = 0.0874), and capecitabine (CA) MDI was significantly lower than 5-FU (82.0 vs 100 %, p < 0.0001). There was a trend to more dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in pts treated with CAPOX (68.42 vs 54.35 %, p = 0.1268), and grade ≥ 2 toxicities were more frequent in CAPOX-treated pts (38.16 vs 15.22 % of patients, p = 0.0079). Survival analysis demonstrated trends towards improved median OS (9.86 vs 7.46 months, p = 0.1183) and median PFS (4.34 vs 3.33 months, p = 0.1674) with CAPOX. In multivariate analysis, CAPOX was associated with improved OS (p = 0.0156, hazard ratio (HR) 0.559) and disease-free survival (DFS) (p = 0.0094, HR 0.549).
conclusionsPatients treated with CAPOX received lower doses of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine compared to FOLFOX and had toxicities of higher grade but did not have worsened clinical outcomes.
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.