Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28746215›Full record

SynthesisMedicine2017

S-1 monotherapy versus S-1 combination therapy in gemcitabine-refractory advanced pancreatic cancer: A meta-analysis (PRISMA) of randomized control trials.

Sheng Zhong, Shuai Qie, Liu Yang, Qi Yan, Linna Ge, Zhongfeng Wang

Open access · goldAbstract readComparative StudyMeta-AnalysisReview
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Medicine, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.5field-weighted citation impact, top 33% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Clinical application and drug resistance mechanism of gemcitabine.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

6 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Sheng ZhongDepartment of Neurosurgery, the First Hospital of Jilin University Clinical College, Jilin University, Changchun, China Department of the Radiotherapy, Hebei University Affiliated Hospital, Baoding Public Health College, Jilin University Basic Medical College, Qiqihar Medical University, Qiqihar Radiology Department, Jixi Mining General Hospital, Jixi Hepatopancreatobiliary Medicine Department, the First Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.
Shuai Qie
Liu Yang
Qi Yan
Linna Ge
Zhongfeng Wang
Affiliated Hospital of Hebei University · CNFirst Hospital of Jilin University · CNHuaibei Mining (China) · CNJilin Medical University · CNQiqihar Medical University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPancreatic cancer (PC) is one of the most lethal digestive system tumors. Most new cases are diagnosed based on metastasis or local aggression and are known as "advanced PC." Recently, studies investigating S-1 have indicated that it has a better clinical curative effect on PC. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy compared with S-1 combination regimens in patients with gemcitabine (GEM)-refractory PC.

methodsTrials published between 1978 and 2016 were identified by an electronic search of public databases (Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library). All prospective studies were independently identified by 2 authors for inclusion. The response rate (RR), progression-free and overall survival (PFS and OS, respectively), and the primary toxicities were extracted for the meta-analysis.

resultsFour randomized controlled trials consisting of 623 patients were included in the analysis, among which 315 patients underwent S-1 monotherapy and 308 patients underwent S-1 combination therapy. The pooled data showed a significantly higher response rate and longer PFS in the S-1 combination group than in the S-1 monotherapy group (RR, 1.75; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.19-2.57; P = .005 and hazard ration [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.62-0.91; P = .005). There were no significant differences in OS or adverse events.

conclusionsCompared with the S-1 monotherapy group, the S-1 combination group had a higher response rate and longer PFS. Both groups had few adverse events, which were balanced between the groups. The subgroup analysis suggested that S-1 combination regimens with leucovorin or irinotecan (CPT-11) provided promising efficacy. These promising combination regimens should be considered for patients with advanced PC who choose S-1 as their second-line therapy.

Indexed as

Antimetabolites, AntineoplasticAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsDeoxycytidineDrug CombinationsDrug Resistance, NeoplasmGemcitabineHumansOxonic AcidPancreatic NeoplasmsRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTegafurAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticDeoxycytidineDrug CombinationsGemcitabineOxonic AcidS 1 (combination)Tegafur

Identifiers

PMID28746215
PMCPMC5627841
OpenAlexW2736755180

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.