4.2 Review

High/positive expression of 5-fluorouracil metabolic enzymes predicts better response to S-1 in patients with gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL MARKERS
Volume 31, Issue 2, Pages E101-E109

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.5301/jbm.5000202

Keywords

5-Fluorouracil metabolic enzymes; Gastric cancer; Meta-analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: To provide an assessment by meta-analysis of the relationship between the expression variations of 5-fluorouracil metabolic enzymes and clinical outcomes in patients with gastric cancer treated with S-1. Method: Databases were searched electronically from inception to April 19th, 2015. Studies in gastric cancer patients treated with S-1 investigating the expression variations of 5-fluorouracil metabolic enzymes were included after having been identified systematically. Pooled odds ratios (OR) for the objective response rate (ORR) and median survival ratio were calculated using the Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 12.0 software separately. Results: A total of 555 patients in 10 studies met our inclusion criteria. There was a significant difference in ORR between patients with high/+ and low/-expression of orotate phosphoribosyl transferase (OPRT) (OR = 8.06; 95% CI, 4.06-16.02; p<0.001) and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) (OR = 1.95; 95% CI, 1.21-3.13; p = 0.006). There was no significant difference in ORR between different expression levels of thymidylate synthase (TS) and thymidine phosphorylase (TP). Although patients with low/-TS expression, low/-TP expression and high/+ DPD expression showed a trend towards longer survival, no statistical significance was found. The median OS was significantly longer in patients with high/+ expression of OPRT (p = 0.076). Conclusions: OPRT and DPD expression can be treated as a potential predictive biomarker for S-1 response in gastric cancer patients. Further investigation is warranted.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available