Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32077628›Full record

ArticleAsia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology2020

Comparison of S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) and capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as adjuvant chemotherapies for stage II and III gastric cancer after D2 resection: A single-center retrospective study.

Zhichao Jiang, Yongkun Sun, Wen Zhang, Chengxu Cui, Lin Yang, Aiping Zhou

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Asia-Pacific journal of clinical oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Zhichao JiangNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0092-1494
Yongkun SunNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Wen ZhangNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chengxu CuiNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Lin YangNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Aiping ZhouNational Cancer Center/Cancer Hospital, Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences and Peking Union Medical College, Beijing, China.
Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences & Peking Union Medical College · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCapecitabine plus oxaliplatin (XELOX) as adjuvant therapy for gastric cancer (GC) reduces cancer recurrence and improves survival. S-1 plus oxaliplatin (SOX) is well-tolerated and effective against advanced GC, and also be used widely in adjuvant treatment. However, data comparing SOX and XELOX as adjuvant treatments are lacking.

methodData on treatment modalities, adverse events, recurrence and metastasis were collected from 180 patients with stage II and III GC, who received SOX or XELOX after D2 gastrectomy between January 2012 and December 2015, and analyzed retrospectively. The primary endpoint was 3-year disease-free survival (DFS) rate.

resultsMedian follow was 52.9 months; 3-year DFS rate and overall survival (OS) rate were 75.2% and 67.6% (P = 0.359) and 81.2% and 83.3% (P = 0.77) in the SOX and XELOX groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in peritoneal metastasis rates in the SOX and XELOX groups (8.6% vs 15%, respectively; P = 0.232). Compound recurrent disease was associated with significantly shorter OS. Multivariate analysis identified metastatic lymph node ratio (LNR) as an independent prognostic factor for OS (P = 0.036; hazard ratio = 2.875; 95% confidence interval, 1.069-7.729); the LNR ≥17% group had inferior 3-year OS rate to the LNR <17% group (P = 0.001). The incidence of grades 3 and 4 adverse events was similar in both groups; however, grade ≥2 hand-foot syndrome was significantly less frequent in the SOX group (P = 0.01).

conclusionSOX has similar survival benefits to XELOX and is well-tolerated in Chinese patients with GC following D2 gastrectomy.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCapecitabineChemotherapy, AdjuvantDrug CombinationsFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm Recurrence, LocalNeoplasm StagingOxaliplatinOxonic AcidRetrospective StudiesCapecitabineDrug CombinationsOxaliplatinOxonic AcidS 1 (combination)Tegafuradjuvant chemotherapygastric cancerSOXXELOX

Identifiers

PMID32077628
PMCPMC7318315
OpenAlexW3007906241

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.