Trial reportMedicine2017
A randomized, multicenter, phase III study of gemcitabine combined with capecitabine versus gemcitabine alone as first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer in South Korea.
Trial report in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 6 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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.
- Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2024Pooled it
- Comparative Outcomes of First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Among the Regimens Used in Japan: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- The underreporting of phase III chemo-therapeutic clinical trial data of older patients with cancer: A systematic review.Journal of geriatric oncology · 2020Pooled it
- Chemotherapy in Pancreatic Cancer: A Systematic Review.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2018Pooled it
- Chemotherapy and radiotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018Pooled it
- Advances in the Management of Pancreatic Cancer: Current Strategies and Emerging Therapies.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Efficacy and safety of triplet regimen capecitabine, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (XELOXIRI) as first-line chemotherapy for advanced pancreatic cancer.BMC cancer · 2025Article
- Current and Emerging Treatment Options for Pancreatic Cancer: A Comprehensive Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The efficacy and safety of gemcitabine-based combination therapyJournal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2022Article
- Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Unconventional Approaches for an Unconventional Disease.Cancer research · 2020Review
- Article
- Review
- Current Clinical Strategies of Pancreatic Cancer Treatment and Open Molecular Questions.International journal of molecular sciences · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors at 1 institution in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis phase III trial compared the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus capecitabine (GemCap) versus single-agent gemcitabine (Gem) in advanced pancreatic cancer as first-line chemotherapy.
methodsA total of 214 advanced pancreatic cancer patients were enrolled from 16 hospitals in South Korea between 2007 and 2011. Patients were randomly assigned to receive GemCap (oral capecitabine 1660 mg/m plus Gem 1000 mg/m by 30-minute intravenous infusion weekly for 3 weeks followed by a 1-week break every 4 weeks) or Gem (by 30-minute intravenous infusion weekly for 3 weeks every 4 weeks).
resultsMedian overall survival (OS) time, the primary end point, was 10.3 and 7.5 months in the GemCap and Gem arms, respectively (P = 0.06). Progression-free survival was 6.2 and 5.3 months in the GemCap and Gem arms, respectively (P = 0.08). GemCap significantly improved overall response rate compared with Gem alone (43.7% vs 17.6%; P = 0.001). Overall frequency of grade 3 or 4 toxicities was similar in each group. Neutropenia was the most frequent grade 3 or 4 toxicity in both groups.
conclusionGemCap failed to improve OS at a statistically significant level compared to Gem treatment. This study showed a trend toward improved OS compared to Gem alone. GemCap and Gem both exhibited similar safety profiles.
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.