ArticleJournal of gastrointestinal oncology2024
Efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus raltitrexed or S-1 versus standard third-line therapies in metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of gastrointestinal oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: After the failure of standard first- and second-line treatments, including oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) combined with targeted drugs, the currently recommended third-line regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) include TAS-102, regorafenib, and fruquintinib. However, these regimens have the drawbacks of mediocre efficacy, substantive side effects, and high cost. Therefore, more effective, economical regimens with fewer side effects are needed in clinical practice. In this study, we assessed the efficacy and safety of gemcitabine plus raltitrexed or S-1 as a third- or later-line treatment in comparison to those of standard third-line therapies for patients with mCRC. Methods: Patients with previous failures of at least two lines of standard therapy with oxaliplatin, 5-FU, irinotecan, or capecitabine combined with targeted drugs were included. The participants received standard third-line therapies (including TAS-102, regorafenib, and fruquintinib) or gemcitabine plus raltitrexed or S-1 until disease progression, death, or intolerable toxicity arose. Imaging follow-up was performed every 3 months during their treatment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were recorded. Cox regression analysis was used to investigate the potential predictors of survival. Results: From April 2018 to October 2022, 60 patients with mCRC were enrolled in our study. The numbers of patients in the chemotherapy, fruquintinib, regorafenib, and TAS-102 groups were 13, 15, 17, and 15, respectively; the median OS of the four groups was 7.4, 6.1, 8.3, and 6.7 months (P=0.384), respectively; the median PFS was 4.1, 3.4, 4.4, and 2.3 months (P=0.656), respectively; the overall response rate was 7.69%, 6.67%, 0.00%, and 13.33%, respectively; and the disease control rate was 61.54%, 60.00%, 70.59%, and 60.00%, respectively. Additionally, multivariate analysis revealed that primary lesion located in the rectum was adverse independent prognostic factors for OS. A typical case is presented in this article. Conclusions: The gemcitabine plus raltitrexed or S-1 regimen is a potential regimen with tolerable adverse reactions and low cost for patients with 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.