Observational studyThe Pan African medical journal2022
Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer at Tygerberg Hospital: a retrospective study.
Observational study in The Pan African medical journal, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Oxaliplatin combined with capecitabine therapy and comprehensive nursing in advanced colorectal cancer patients.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Chemotherapeutic potential of betanin/capecitabine combination targeting colon cancer: experimental and bioinformatic studies exploring NFκB and cyclin D1 interplay.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2024Article
- Retrospective cohort study for thrombocytopenia during concurrent chemoradiotherapy for rectal cancer.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: a capecitabine and oxaliplatin drug combination regimen has shown a survival benefit in patients with advanced colorectal cancer, yet its administration represents an attractive option for low resource settings. This study aimed to describe the therapeutic utility, efficacy and safety of a capecitabine plus oxaliplatin drug combination in patients with colorectal cancer. Methods: a review of medical records of sixty adult patients with histological diagnosis of colorectal cancer at Tygerberg Hospital between June 2012 and June 2017 was conducted. The overall response rate was assessed after a three cycle regime of capecitabine and oxaliplatin with the progression-free survival (PSF) results estimated using the Kaplan-Meier methods. Results: among the 60 participants identified over the study period, the median age was 53 years with 45% being female (n=27). Records showed that 58.33% of patients had the colon as the primary site and 68.33% of patients had synchronous liver metastases at presentation. On average, all patients received 6 cycle regimes of capecitabine and oxaliplatin. Sixty percent of the patients received this treatment regime with palliative intent while in the radical-intent group, equal numbers of patients received the regime as either neoadjuvant or adjuvant. A liver resection was also performed in 20 patients (31.8%). The overall response rate was 69.6% with 13 patients attaining a complete response. Disease progression was reported in 30.4% and the 1-year progression free survival was 44.5% (95% CI: 0.31-0.57) while the 2-year progression free survival was 25.1% (95% CI: 0.14-0.38). Regarding safety, thrombocytopenia was the most frequent adverse event (18.5%) and overall, 15.1% of patients experienced grade 3 and 4 toxicity. Conclusion: a drug combination of capecitabine and oxaliplatin showed a good overall response rate and survival particularly in patients with resectable colorectal liver metastases.
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.