S-1-based therapy versus 5-FU-based therapy in advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis
- 384 Downloads
We set out to evaluate the efficacy and safety of S-1-based therapy versus fluorouracil (5-FU)-based therapy in advanced gastric cancer (AGC). Eligible studies were identified from Pubmed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. Additionally, abstracts presented at American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) conferences held between January 2000 and November 2009 were searched to identify relevant clinical trials. The outcome included overall survival (OS), overall response rate (ORR), and grade 3/4 advent events. Four randomized controlled trials (one full text and three abstracts) with 2,115 participants in AGC were identified in our analysis(1,065 patients were in the S-1-based group, 1,050 patients were in the 5-FU-based group). Meta-analysis showed there was significant OS benefit in favor of S-1-based therapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.87, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.79 to 0.96). Pooled estimate for ORR showed no significant difference between S-1-based group and 5-FU-based group (OR = 1.25, 95%CI: 0.31 to 5.09). Lower incidence of grade 3/4 neutropenia was observed in patients with S-1-based therapy (OR = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.25 to 0.44). With regard to grade 3/4 anemia (OR = 1.20, 95%CI: 0.74 to 1.96), leucopenia (OR = 1.09, 95%CI: 0.43 to 2.74), stomatitis (OR = 2.65, 95%CI: 0.12 to 58.89), diarrhea (OR = 0.53, 95% CI: 0.00 to 229.10), nausea (OR = 1.36, 95%CI: 0.68 to 2.72), and treatment-related deaths (OR = 1.84, 95%CI: 0.95 to 3.54), equivalent frequencies were found between groups. S-1-based therapy significantly improved OS in relation to 5-FU-based therapy. ORR and safety profile were considerable between two groups. These results needed to be confirmed by high-quality trials and further studies in the West.
KeywordsS-1 5-FU Advanced gastric cancer Meta-analysis
- 2.Ries LAG, Melbert D,Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975–2004. National Cancer Institute: Bethesda, MD http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004/ based on November 2006 SEER data submission, 2007.
- 8.Shirasaka T, Shimamoto Y, Ohshimo H, Yamaguchi M, Kato T, Yonekura K, et al. Development of a novel form of an oral 5-fluorouracil derivative(S-1) directed to the potentiation of the tumor selective cytotoxicity of 5-fluorouracil by two biochemical modulators. Anticancer Drugs. 1996;7:548–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Higgins JPT, Green S (eds). Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions Version 5.0.1 [updated September 2008]. The Cochrane Collaboration. 2008.Google Scholar
- 14.Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, et al. New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors: European Organization for research and treatment of cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92:205–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Sutton AJ, Abrams KR, Jones DR, Sheldon TA, Song F. Methods for meta-analysis in medical research. Chichester: Wiley; 2000.Google Scholar
- 20.Ajani JA, Rodriguez W, Bodoky G, Moiseyenko V, Lichinitser M, Gorbunova V et al. Multicenter phase III comparison of cisplatin/S-1 (CS) with cisplatin/5-FU (CF) as first-line therapy in patients with advanced gastric cancer (FLAGS) [abstract]. Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium. 2009.Google Scholar
- 21.Fuse N, Fukuda H, Yamada Y, Sawaki A, Koizumi W, Suzuki Y, et al. Updated results of randomized phase III study of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) alone versus combination of irinotecan, cisplatin (CP) versus S-1 alone in advanced gastric cancer (JCOG 9912) [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:15s.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 22.Jin M, Lu H, Li J, Shen L, Chen Z, Shi Y et al. Randomized 3-armed phase III study of S-1 monotherapy versus S-1/CDDP (SP) versus 5-FU/CDDP (FP) in patients (pts) with advanced gastric cancer (AGC): SC-101 study [abstract]. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4533.Google Scholar