A PHP Error was encountered

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: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

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

Randomized phase II trial of chemoradiotherapy with S-1 versus combination chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 as neoadjuvant treatment for resectable pancreatic cancer (JASPAC 04). | LitMetric

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Objective: The aim of the present study was to investigate which treatment, neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NAC-RT) with S-1 or combination neoadjuvant chemotherapy with gemcitabine and S-1 (NAC-GS), is more promising as neoadjuvant treatment (NAT) for resectable pancreatic cancer in terms of effectiveness and safety.

Methods: In the NAC-RT with S-1 group, the patients received a total radiation dose of 50.4 Gy in 28 fractions with oral S-1. In the NAC-GS group, the patients received intravenous gemcitabine at a dose of 1000 mg/m with oral S-1 for two cycles. The primary endpoint was the 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) rate. The trial was registered with the UMIN Clinical Trial Registry as UMIN000014894.

Results: From April 2014 to April 2017, a total of 103 patients were enrolled. After exclusion of one patient because of ineligibility, 51 patients were included in the NAC-RT with S-1 group, and 51 patients were included in the NAC-GS group in the intention-to-treat analysis. The 2-year PFS rate was 45.0% (90% confidence interval [CI]: 33.3%-56.0%) in the NAC-RT with S-1 group and 54.9% (42.8%-65.5%) in the NAC-GS group (p = .350). The 2-year overall survival rate was 66.7% in the NAC-RT with S-1 group and 72.4% in the NAC-GS group (p = .300). Although leukopenia and neutropenia rates were significantly higher in the NAC-GS group than in the NAC-RT with S-1 group (p = .023 and p < .001), other adverse events of NAT and postoperative complications were comparable between the two groups.

Conclusion: Both NAC-RT with S-1 and NAC-GS are considered promising treatments for resectable pancreatic cancer.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jhbp.1353DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

nac-rt s-1
24
s-1 group
20
nac-gs group
20
group patients
12
s-1
11
group
10
chemotherapy gemcitabine
8
gemcitabine s-1
8
neoadjuvant treatment
8
resectable pancreatic
8

Similar Publications