ArticleScientific reports2017
Capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil and S-1 based regimens for previously untreated advanced oesophagogastric cancer: A network meta-analysis.
Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparison of S-1-based vs. capecitabine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with gastric cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European journal of clinical pharmacology · 2021Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of docetaxel perioperative chemotherapy regimens in gastric and esophagogastric tumors.Scientific reports · 2019Pooled it
- MTHFR polymorphism is associated with increased adverse events and poor clinical outcomes in gastric cancer patients with adjuvant S-1 chemotherapy.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Postoperative malnutrition predicts severe chemotherapy toxicity after gastrectomy: evaluation of an inflammation-anemia phenotype.Open medicine (Warsaw, Poland) · 2026Article
- Induction Camrelizumab and Modified TPF (Nab-Paclitaxel, Cisplatin, and S-1) in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.Cancer science · 2025Article
- Comparison of PSOX (paclitaxel, oxaliplatin, S-1) and SOX (oxaliplatin, S-1) as postoperative adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II-III gastric cancer.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Hand-foot syndrome in cancer patients on capecitabine: examining prevalence, impacts, and associated risk factors at a cancer centre in Malaysia.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024Article
- Detailed analysis of metastatic colorectal cancer patients who developed cardiotoxicity on another fluoropyrimidine and switched to S-1 treatment (subgroup analysis of the CardioSwitch-study).Acta oncologica (Stockholm, Sweden) · 2024Article
- Outcomes of Third-Line Trastuzumab Deruxtecan in a Patient with De Novo Stage 4 HER2-Positive Gastric Adenocarcinoma with Enteroblastic Differentiation: A Case Report.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- S-1/temozolomide versus S-1/temozolomide plus thalidomide in advanced pancreatic and non-pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (STEM): A randomised, open-label, multicentre phase 2 trial.EClinicalMedicine · 2022Article
- Article
- Observational
- A Review of Potential Role of Capsule Endoscopy in the Work-Up for Chemotherapy-Induced Diarrhea.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Article
- Small intestinal mucosal injury and its risk factors in patients with gastrointestinal cancer who developed complicated fluoropyrimidine-induced diarrhea.BMC gastroenterology · 2020Article
- Prognosis of Adjuvant SOX vs XELOX Chemotherapy for Gastric Cancer After D2 Gastrectomy in Chinese Patients.Cancer management and research · 2020Article
- Recent progress of chemotherapy and biomarkers for gastroesophageal cancer.World journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2019Review
- S-1 in Patients with Advanced Esophagogastric Adenocarcinoma: Results from the Safety Compliance Observatory on Oral fluoroPyrimidines (SCOOP) Study.Drugs in R&D · 2019Observational
- The Use of (Network) Meta-Analysis in Clinical Oncology.Frontiers in oncology · 2019Article
- Survival Benefit of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Locally Advanced Adenocarcinoma of Esophagogastric Junction.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
As evidence is inconsistent and based on either isolated Asian or Western studies, we conducted a network meta-analysis (NMA) to examine efficacy and safety of 5-FU (5-fluorouracil), capecitabine and S-1-based first-line treatment of advanced esophagogastric cancer in Asian and Western patients. Medline, EMBASE, CENTRAL and conferences ASCO and ESMO were searched up to January 2016 for randomized-controlled-trials comparing 5-FU, capecitabine or S-1-based regimens with equal chemotherapy backbones. Direct and indirect data for overall survival (OS) and progression-free-survival (PFS) were combined on the Hazard Ratio (HR)-scale using random-effects NMA and calculated as combined HRs and 95%credible intervals (95%CrI). Grade 1-2 and grade 3-4 adverse events were compared with pair-wise meta-analysis. Fifteen studies were identified including capecitabine (n = 945), 5-FU (n = 2,132) or S-1 (n = 1,636). No differences were found in respectively OS and PFS for capecitabine-based versus 5-FU-based regimens (HR = 0.89, 95%CrI = 0.76-1.04 and HR = 0.98, 95%CrI = 0.75-1.32), S-1-based versus 5-FU-based regimens (HR = 0.92, 95%CrI = 0.82-1.04 and HR = 0.88, 95%CrI = 0.70-1.11) and S-1-based versus capecitabine-based regimens (HR = 1.03, 95%CrI = 0.87-1.22 and HR = 0.89, 95%CrI = 0.65-1.20). Effects were similar in Asian and Western subgroups. Toxicity profiles were different but a lower frequency of relevant adverse events was observed with S-1 In conclusion, as efficacy was similar, choosing fluoropyrimidines should be based on their individual toxicity 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.