ArticleJournal of thoracic disease2015
Variability in the anti-tumor effect of tegafur-uracil depending on histologic types of lung cancer.
Article in Journal of thoracic disease, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Strategy for chemotherapeutic delivery using a nanosized porous metal-organic framework with a central composite design.International journal of nanomedicine · 2017Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTegafur-uracil (UFT) is an anticancer agent that inhibits thymidylate synthase (TS). The degree of TS expression in primary lung cancer (LC) is different according to histologic cell type. In this study, we examined the variability of the anti-tumor efficacy of UFT monotherapy depending on histological subtypes of LC.
methodsIn the current single-institution, retrospective study, we assigned the patients with LC to three histologic groups [the squamous (Sq) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)] group, the non-Sq NSCLC group and the SCLC group] and then compared the clinical response to UFT monotherapy between the three groups.
resultsOur clinical series of 149 patients include 54 cases of Sq NSCLC, 67 cases of non-Sq NSCLC and 28 cases of SCLC. For Sq NSCLC, non-Sq NSCLC and SCLC group, the overall response rates (ORRs) were 1%, 1% and 0% (P=0.522), respectively. The disease control rates (DCRs) were 38.9%, 31.3% and 10.7% (P=0.012), respectively. The median progression-free survivals (PFSs) were 2.68, 2.25 and 1.46 months (P=0.004 for three groups and P=0.773 for two groups except for the SCLC group at the log-rank test), respectively. There was no significant difference between the groups in median overall survival (OS).
conclusionsOur results indicate that the degree of the anti-tumor effect of UFT was higher in patients with NSCLC as compared with SCLC. But it showed no significant difference between the patients with Sq NSCLC and those with non-Sq NSCLC.
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.