SynthesisMedicine2019
Capecitabine versus 5-fluorouracil in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy of locally advanced rectal cancer: A meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Results of phase Ib/II trial of PEP503 (NBTXR3, radioenhancer) with chemoradiotherapy in patients with rectal cancer.Nanomedicine (London, England) · 2025Trial
- Real-World Data on the Practice of Chemoradiation with Select Cohort Consolidation Chemotherapy in High-Risk Locally Advanced Rectal Cancers (SOLAR study).South Asian journal of cancer · 2025Article
- Capecitabine/Mitomycin versus 5-Fluorouracil/Mitomycin in Combination with Simultaneous Integrated Boost Intensity-Modulated Radiation Therapy for Anal Cancer.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2023Article
- Rectal Cancer Tissue Lipidome Differs According to Response to Neoadjuvant Therapy.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Article
- Overview of Evidence-Based Chemotherapy for Oral Cancer: Focus on Drug Resistance Related to the Epithelial-Mesenchymal Transition.Biomolecules · 2021Review
- Characteristics of Patients Presented With Metastases During or After Completion of Chemoradiation Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer: A Case Series.Annals of coloproctology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe differences in efficacy between capecitabine and 5-fuorouracil (5-FU) in neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (CRT) of locally advanced rectal cancer (LARC) are not well recognized. We performed this meta-analysis to analyze the effect of capecitabine and 5-FU on neoadjuvant CRT to more accurately understand the differences between the 2 drugs.
methodsMEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Wanfang Database were performed to identify all published studies investigating the efficacy of capecitabine in neoadjuvant CRT of LARC versus 5-FU before August, 2017. Primary endpoint was the odds ratio (OR) for improving pathological complete response (pCR) rate of patients with LARC. Secondary endpoints were the ORs of efficiency for downstaging tumor and increasing R0 resection in patients with LARC. Safety analyses were also performed. The OR was the principal measurement of effect, which was calculated as capecitabine group versus 5-FU group, and was presented as a point estimate with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). All calculations and statistical tests were performed using RevMan 5.3 software.
resultsIn all, 2916 patients with LARC enrolled in the 10 studies were divided into capecitabine group (n = 1451) and 5-FU group (n = 1465). The meta-analysis showed that capecitabine improved pCR (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.10-1.63), and R0 resection rate (OR 1.92, 95% CI 1.10-3.36). There were no statistically significant differences either in overall downstaging rate (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.79-2.16) or in the tumor downstaging rate (OR 1.24, 95% CI 0.79-1.92), but there was a significant difference of the nodal downstaging rate between the 2 groups (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.11-2.54). There was no statistically significant difference in sphincter preservation rate between the 2 groups (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.96-1.92). No obvious safety concerns about mortality and complications were raised in these studies. There were no statistically significant differences in 3-year disease-free-survival (OR 1.29, 95% CI 0.75-2.20), and in grade 3 to 4 acute toxicity during CRT (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.31-1.30).
conclusionsCompared with 5-FU-based neoadjuvant CRT, capecitabine-based neoadjuvant CRT can safely improve pCR, nodal down-staging, ad R0 resection of patients with LARC.
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.