Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27577082›Full record

Observational studyOncotarget2016

Effectiveness of capecitabine with or without docetaxel therapy for the treatment of patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma: a single-institution experience.

Cong Xue, Xin An, Ye Cao, Tanhuan Chen, Wei Yang, Yingfei Deng, Hui Han, Xiaoyu Teng, Fangjian Zhou, Yanxia Shi

Open access · diamondAbstract readObservational Study
In one paragraph

Observational study in Oncotarget, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 34% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Cong XueDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xin AnDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Ye CaoDepartment of GCP, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Tanhuan ChenDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Wei YangDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yingfei DengDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Hui HanDepartment of Urology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Xiaoyu TengDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Fangjian ZhouDepartment of Urology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Yanxia ShiDepartment of Medical Oncology, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Sun Yat-Sen University Cancer Center, Guangzhou, People's Republic of China.
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThe purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and toxicity of capecitabine (C) chemotherapy regimen with or without (w/o) docetaxel (D) in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma (UC).

resultsClinical benefit rate were similar in two arms (C arm vs DC arm: 38.9% vs 45.5%, p = 0.411). There were two cases achieved partial response in DC arm. In C arm, the median PFS was 3.0 months (95% CI 2.5-3.5 months) and median OS was 11.3 months (95% CI 8.6-14.1 months). In DC arm, the median PFS was 2.2 months (95% CI 1.7-2.7 months) and median OS was 18 months (95% CI 6.8-29.9 months). Adverse events were mostly acceptable, including myelosuppession, hand-foot syndrome and mucositis. Anemia and leukopenia was found more in the DC arm than in the C arm. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis is a one-center, observational, retrospective study. From April 2009 to March 2015, a total of 29 patients with metastatic UC were included in the study. Survivals, response rates and toxicities were collected retrospectively.

conclusionsThe result showed the activity and toxicity of C w/o D. As DC treatment did not reveal better outcome, C or D single-agent might be an option in platinum-failed patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. Further clinical trials are warranted.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCapecitabineCarcinomaCarcinoma, Transitional CellDisease-Free SurvivalDocetaxelFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm MetastasisPalliative CareAntineoplastic AgentsCapecitabineDocetaxelTaxoidscapecitabinechemotherapydocetaxelsecond-lineurothelial cancer

Identifiers

PMID27577082
PMCPMC5325398
OpenAlexW2507230732

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.