4.4 Article

Capecitabine metronomic chemotherapy for palliative treatment of elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer after fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy

Journal

MEDICAL ONCOLOGY
Volume 29, Issue 1, Pages 100-106

Publisher

HUMANA PRESS INC
DOI: 10.1007/s12032-010-9791-x

Keywords

Metronomic chemotherapy; Advanced gastric cancer; Capecitabine; Elderly patients

Categories

Funding

  1. Shanghai Nature Science Fund, Shanghai, China [0552nm007]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

We aimed to study the efficacy and safety of metronomic capecitabine in pretreated elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer. Eligible patients with advanced gastric cancer were treated with capecitabine at a fixed dose 1,000 mg daily (days 1-28 continuously, every 5 weeks) until disease progression or significant toxicity. Tumor response was assessed every 10 weeks by computed tomography scan using Response Evaluation Criteria in solid tumors. In total, 45 patients were enrolled, of whom 43 were evaluated for efficacy and 45 for safety. A median of 3 cycles (range 1-12) were administered. Metronomic chemotherapy had a disease control rate (DCR) at 8 weeks of 51.1% (95% CI 25.7-67.8), and the objective response rate was 20.9% (95% CI 13.1-38.5, 9 of 43 assessable patients). The median time-to-progression and median overall survival were 3.6 months (95% CI: 3.2-4.0 months) and 7.6 months (95% CI 7.0-8.2 months), respectively. Grade II neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were observed in 13.3 and 2.2% of patients, respectively. Grade II/III nonhematological toxicities included diarrhea (4.4%), stomatitis (13.4%), and hand-foot syndrome (15.5%). No grade IV toxicity, neutropenic fever or treatment-related deaths occurred. Metronomic capecitabine was effective and well tolerated as palliative treatment in elderly patients with advanced gastric cancer after fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available