SynthesisInternational journal of colorectal disease2020
A meta-analysis of efficacy and safety of S-1 monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment in metastatic colorectal cancer.
Synthesis in International journal of colorectal disease, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Combination of potassium oxonate with anti-PD-1 for the treatment of colorectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare the efficacy and safety profile of S-1-based versus non-S-1-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in mCRC.
methodsRelevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were obtained from PubMed, Embase, and Ovid databases and the Cochrane library from database set up in May 2018. The RCTs of S-1-based monotherapy or combination therapy as first-line treatment were selected. The impact of S-1-based chemotherapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) was assessed by pooling data via RevMan 5.3.
resultsMeta-analysis of 10 RCTs showed that S-1-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.84-0.97, P = 0.006). In subgroup analysis, there was a statistically significant increase in PFS when S-1-based chemotherapy was compared with 5-FU-based (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84-1.00, P = 0.04) or capecitabine-based chemotherapy (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73-0.99, P = 0.04). The meta-analysis of OS (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05, P = 0.36), overall response rate (ORR) (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.84-1.17, P = 0.90), and disease control rate (DCR) (HR 1.61, 95% CI 0.87-3.00, P = 0.13) showed no statistical significance between S-1-based and non-S-1-based chemotherapy. The statistically significant differences in the meta-analysis indicated less incidence of graded 3-4 leucopenia (OR = 0.30, 95% CI 0.13-0.71, P = 0.006) and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) (OR = 0.24, 95% CI 0.10-0.58, P = 0.001) in the S-1-based chemotherapy, and there was no statistically significant difference for other adverse events.
conclusionsS-1-based chemotherapy in mono or combined therapy was an attractive alternative to standard first-line regimen for patients of mCRC.
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.