ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2025
FLOT vs DOS neoadjuvant chemotherapy in locally advanced gastric cancer: propensity score analysis.
Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2025. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe safety and efficacy of neoadjuvant FLOT (Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, Docetaxel) and DOS (Docetaxel, Oxaliplatin, S-1) regimens for locally advanced gastric cancer (LAGC) have not been compared.
methodsPatients with histologically confirmed LAGC (stage ≥ cT3 or cN + , no metastasis) treated between 2017-2021 were retrospectively included and propensity-matched into FLOT (4 cycles, n = 72) and DOS (3 cycles, n = 72) groups. Outcomes included RECIST response, grade 3/4 adverse events, surgical/pathological results, and R0 resection rates, and long-term survival (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]).
resultsRECIST response rates were 41.7% (FLOT) vs. 47.2% (DOS); R0 resection rates were 63.9% vs. 72.2%. No significant differences were observed in operative time, blood loss, hospital stay, histopathological regression (TRG1a: 2.8% vs. 8.3%; TRG1b: 13.9% vs. 16.7%), postoperative morbidity (29.8% vs. 24.5%), or grade 3/4 toxicity (20.8% vs. 13.9%). The 5-year OS rates were 42.7% and 50.4% (p = 0.652), and the PFS rates were 33.7% and 41.4% (p = 0.548) for the FLOT and DOS groups, respectively.
conclusionDOS demonstrated no significant but favorable feasibility, safety, and efficacy compared to FLOT in LAGC. Shorter hospital stay with DOS may enhance patient comfort and reduce healthcare burden.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41055838What 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.