Severity: Warning
Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests
Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line Number: 197
Backtrace:
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url
File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3165
Function: getPubMedXML
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global
File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword
File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once
98%
921
2 minutes
20
Background: Platinum/S-1 (PS) and platinum/5-fluorouracil (PF) as first-line chemotherapies are extensively used for the treatment of advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (AGC); however, there is no definite consensus on which regimen is best. In our meta-analysis, we compared PS with PF in terms of their efficacy and safety in AGC patients.
Methods: PubMed, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Scopus, Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, The Cochrane Library, Google Scholar, and CNKI were systematically searched for pertinent literature. We analyzed overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and adverse effects (AEs) as major end points.
Results: A total of 3,225 studies were identified, among which 6 randomized controlled trials, including 1,736 participants, were ultimately included in our analysis. Our results showed that PS and PF were comparable in terms of OS (p = 0.33, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.84-1.06), PFS (p = 0.63, 95% CI: 0.87-1.09), ORR (p = 0.38, 95% CI: 0.91-1.28), DCR (p = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.86-1.43), total AEs (p = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.98-1.01), and grade ≥3 AEs (p = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.82-1.41). However, those who received PF had a shorter time to failure (TTF) (p = 0.01, 95% CI: 0.77-0.97), and a significantly higher rate and more severe cases of stomatitis, nausea, and hypokalemia were reported in the PF group.
Conclusions: PF and PS show similar antitumor efficacy (OS, PFS, ORR, and DCR), but patients receiving PS exhibit longer TTF and fewer AEs (stomatitis, nausea, and hypokalemia) than those receiving PF.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000506671 | DOI Listing |