Cited by 425

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

First-line oral capecitabine therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: a favorable safety profile compared with intravenous5-fluorouracil/leucovorin

Cassidy, J., Twelves, C., Van Cutsem, E., Hoff, P., Bajetta, E., Boyer, M., Bugat, R., Burger, U., Garin, A., Graeven, U., McKendrick, J., Maroun, J., Marshall, J., Osterwalder, B., Pérez-Manga, G., Rosso, R., Rougier, P., Schilsky, R.L.·2002·Annals of Oncology

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate the safety profile of capecitabine using data from a large, well-characterized population of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated in two phase II studies. In these trials, capecitabine achieved significantly superior response rates, equivalent time to disease progression and equivalent survival compared with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin. Patients and methods Patients (n = 1207) were randomized to either oral capecitabine (1250 mg/m2 twice daily, on days 1-14 every 21 days) or intravenous (i.v.) bolus 5-FU/leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen). Results Capecitabine demonstrated a safety profile superior to that of 5-FU/leucovorin, with a significantly lower incidence of diarrhea, stomatitis, nausea, alopecia and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia leading to significantly fewer neutropenic fever/sepsis cases and fewer hospitalizations. All patients in the capecitabine group received a starting dose of 1250 mg/m2 twice daily and the majority (66%) did not require dose modification for adverse events. In the 5-FU/leucovorin group, 58% of patients did not require dose reduction for toxicities. The capecitabine dose-modification scheme reduced the recurrence of key toxicities without compromising efficacy. In both treatment arms, patients with moderate renal impairment at baseline (estimated creatinine clearance 30-50 ml/min) experienced a higher incidence of grade 3 or 4 toxicities. This increase was more pronounced with 5-FU/leucovorin. Conclusions Capecita…

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/annonc/mdf089

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 12

  1. Miwa, 1998, Design of a novel oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate, capecitabine, which generates 5-fluorouracil selectively in tumours by enzymes concentrated in human liver and cancer tissue, Eur J Cancer, 34, 1274, 10.1016/S0959-8049(98)00058-6 · DOI
  2. Pazdur, 1999, Multicenter phase III study of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or UFT™ in combination with leucovorin (LV) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer, Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol, 263, 18
  3. Schüller, 2000, Preferential activation of capecitabine in tumor following oral administration in colorectal cancer patients, Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 45, 291, 10.1007/s002800050043 · DOI · Paper page
  4. Blum, 1999, Multicenter phase II study of capecitabine in paclitaxel-refractory metastatic breast cancer, J Clin Oncol, 17, 485, 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.2.485 · DOI
  5. Blum, 2001, Multicenter, phase II study of capecitabine in taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer, Cancer, 92, 1759, 10.1002/1097-0142(20011001)92:7<1759::AID-CNCR1691>3.0.CO;2-A · DOI
  6. Van Cutsem, 2000, Capecitabine, an oral fluoropyrimidine carbamate with substantial activity in advanced colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase II study, J Clin Oncol, 18, 1337, 10.1200/JCO.2000.18.6.1337 · DOI
  7. Van Cutsem, 2001, Oral capecitabine compared with intravenous 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a large phase III study, J Clin Oncol, 19, 4097, 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.21.4097 · DOI
  8. Hoff, 2001, Comparison of oral capecitabine (Xeloda®) v intravenous 5-fluorouracil plus leucovorin (Mayo Clinic regimen) as first-line treatment in 605 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase III study, J Clin Oncol, 19, 2282, 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.8.2282 · DOI
  9. Hoff, 2000, Capecitabine as first-line treatment for colorectal cancer (CRC): integrated results of 1207 patients (pts) from 2 randomized, phase III studies. On behalf of the Capecitabine CRC Study Group, Ann Oncol, 60, 11
  10. Cockcroft, 1976, Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine, Nephron, 16, 31, 10.1159/000180580 · DOI
  11. Baker, 2000, Pharmacology of fluorinated pyrimidines: eniluracil, Invest New Drugs, 18, 373, 10.1023/A:1006453500629 · DOI
  12. Twelves, 1999, Effect of hepatic dysfunction due to liver metastases on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites, Clin Cancer Res, 5, 1696

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 425

Metadata

Authors
Cassidy, J., Twelves, C., Van Cutsem, E., Hoff, P., Bajetta, E., Boyer, M., Bugat, R., Burger, U., Garin, A., Graeven, U., McKendrick, J., Maroun, J., Marshall, J., Osterwalder, B., Pérez-Manga, G., Rosso, R., Rougier, P., & Schilsky, R. L.
Venue
Annals of Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2002-04
Volume
13
Issue
4
Pages
566-575
ISSN
0923-7534
Cited by
425
References
0
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review