Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35175316›Full record

Trial reportJAMA oncology2022

Effect of Capecitabine Maintenance Therapy Plus Best Supportive Care vs Best Supportive Care Alone on Progression-Free Survival Among Patients With Newly Diagnosed Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma Who Had Received Induction Chemotherapy: A Phase 3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Guo-Ying Liu, Wang-Zhong Li, De-Shen Wang, Hu Liang, Xing Lv, Yan-Fang Ye, Chong Zhao, Liang-Ru Ke, Shu-Hui Lv, Nian Lu and 7 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIIRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA oncology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02460419 (Maintenance Capecitabine Plus Best Supportive Care Versus Best Supportive Care for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 23 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
9.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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.

NCT02460419 phase3completednot on this map

Maintenance Capecitabine Plus Best Supportive Care Versus Best Supportive Care for Metastatic Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: a Multicenter, Randomised, Phase 3 Study.

TypeinterventionalSponsorSun Yat-sen UniversityRan2015 to 2020Enrolled104ConditionsNasopharyngeal CarcinomaArmscapecitabine, Best supportive care (BSC)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

23 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 46 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Maintenance treatment with oral anticancer agents after first-line chemotherapy in patients with recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology : official journal of the European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino-Laryngology - Head and Neck Surgery · 2025
    Pooled it
  3. Capecitabine Maintenance Therapy in Patients with Residual Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma: A Single-Arm, Phase II Trial.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Nasopharyngeal carcinoma. A "different" head and neck tumour. Part B: treatment, prognostic factors, and outcomes.Acta otorhinolaryngologica Italica : organo ufficiale della Societa italiana di otorinolaringologia e chirurgia cervico-facciale · 2023
    Review
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Guo-Ying LiuDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Wang-Zhong LiDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
De-Shen WangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Hu LiangDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xing LvDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Yan-Fang YeClinical Research Design Division, Sun Yat-sen Memorial Hospital, Guangzhou, China.
Chong ZhaoDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Liang-Ru KeDepartment of Medical Imaging, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Shu-Hui LvMedical Affairs Office, The Fifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.
Nian LuDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Wei-Xin BeiDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Zhuo-Chen CaiDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xi ChenDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Chi-Xiong LiangDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Xiang GuoDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Wei-Xiong XiaDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Yan-Qun XiangDepartment of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, Collaborative Innovation Center for Cancer Medicine, Guangdong Key Laboratory of NPC Diagnosis and Therapy, Guangzhou, China.
Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center · CNSun Yat-sen University · CNFifth Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

importanceCapecitabine maintenance therapy improves survival outcomes in various cancer types, but data are limited on the efficacy and safety of capecitabine maintenance therapy in metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

objectiveTo investigate the efficacy and safety of capecitabine maintenance therapy in metastatic NPC. DESIGN, SETTING, AND

participantsThis randomized phase 3 clinical trial was conducted at Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center from May 16, 2015, to January 9, 2020, among 104 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NPC who had achieved disease control after 4 to 6 cycles of induction chemotherapy with paclitaxel, cisplatin, and capecitabine. The final follow-up date was May 30, 2021. All efficacy analyses were conducted in the intention-to-treat population.

interventionsEligible patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either capecitabine maintenance therapy (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily on days 1-14) every 3 weeks plus best supportive care (BSC) (capecitabine maintenance group) or BSC alone after 4 to 6 cycles of induction chemotherapy. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points were objective response rate, duration of response, overall survival, and safety.

resultsThis study included 104 patients (84 men [80.8%]; median age, 47 years [IQR, 38-54 years]), with 52 assigned to the capecitabine maintenance group and 52 assigned to the BSC group. After a median follow-up of 33.8 months (IQR, 22.9-50.7 months), there were 23 events (44.2%) of progression or death in the capecitabine maintenance group and 37 events (71.2%) of progression or death in the BSC group. Median PFS survival was significantly higher in the capecitabine maintenance group (35.9 months [95% CI, 20.5 months-not reached]) than in the BSC group (8.2 months [95% CI, 6.4-10.0 months]), with a hazard ratio of 0.44 (95% CI, 0.26-0.74; P = .002). Higher objective response rates and longer median duration of response were observed in the capecitabine maintenance group (25.0%; 40.0 months) compared with the BSC group (objective response rate, 25.0% [n = 13] vs 11.5% [n = 6]; and median duration of response, 40.0 months [95% CI, not reached-not reached] vs 13.2 months [95% CI, 9.9-16.5 months]). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events during maintenance therapy were anemia (6 of 50 [12.0%]), hand-foot syndrome (5 of 50 [10.0%]), nausea and vomiting (3 of 50 [6.0%]), fatigue (2 of 50 [4.0%]), and mucositis (2 of 50 [4.0%]). No deaths in the maintenance group were deemed treatment-related. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, capecitabine maintenance therapy significantly improved PFS for patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NPC who achieved disease control after capecitabine-containing induction chemotherapy. Capecitabine exhibited manageable toxic effects.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02460419.

Indexed as

Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsNasopharyngeal NeoplasmsCapecitabineFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNasopharyngeal CarcinomaProgression-Free SurvivalCapecitabine

Identifiers

PMID35175316
PMCPMC8855317
OpenAlexW4212789793

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.