Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26619222›Full record

ArticleCancer biology & therapy2016

First-line treatment with hepatic arterial infusion plus capecitabine vs capecitabine alone for elderly patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases.

Xiaodong Li, Liangrong Shi, Jun Wu, Mei Ji, Jiemin Zhao, Weiguang Qiang, Wenge Ding, Jingting Jiang, Qicheng Lu, Changping Wu

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer biology & therapy, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact, top 92% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Xiaodong Lia Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Liangrong Shia Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Jun Wua Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Mei Jia Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Jiemin Zhaoa Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Weiguang Qianga Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Wenge Dingd Department of Orthopedics , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Jingting Jiangb Department of Biological Treatment , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Qicheng Lue Department of Gastrointestinal Surgery , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Changping Wua Department of Oncology , The Third Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University Changzhou , China.
Soochow University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of HAI fluoropyrimidine (FUDR)/capecitabine or single capecitabine as first-line treatment for elderly patients with unresectable colorectal liver metastases (CLMs). Fifty-one elderly patients with liver-only CLMs were eligible for enrollment. Patients were divided into HAI FUDR /capecitabine group and single capecitabine group randomly. The primary endpoint was median survival time (MST), defined as the time from the date of catheter implantation to the date of death or the date of the last follow-up. The secondary endpoint was objective antitumor response and adverse events. The HAI pump was implanted before chemotherapy. All patients received a 3-week cycle of oral capecitabin. In Group A, the RR and DCR were both 95.8%. In Group B, the RR and DCR were 48.1% and 81.5%, respectively. There was significant difference between the RRs of the 2 groups (P < 0.001). But there was no significant difference between the DCRs of the 2 groups (P = 0.053). There was a statistical difference between the MSTs of the 2 groups (18.5 vs.13 months, P = 0.0312). HAI FUDR combined with oral capecitabine as the first-line treatment for elderly patients with CLMs has promising efficacy and safety.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overCapecitabineColorectal NeoplasmsFemaleFloxuridineHepatic ArteryHumansInfusions, Intra-ArterialLiver NeoplasmsMaleNeoplasm MetastasisCapecitabineFloxuridineCapecitabinecolorectal liver metastasesfloxuridinehepatic arterial infusion

Identifiers

PMID26619222
PMCPMC4847804
OpenAlexW2182782000

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.