Gemcitabine/cisplatin versus 5-fluorouracil/mitomycin C chemoradiotherapy in locally advanced pancreatic cancer: A retrospective analysis of 93 patients
Radiation Oncology, ISSN: 1748-717X, Vol: 6, Issue: 1, Page: 88
2011
- 9Citations
- 24Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations9
- Citation Indexes9
- CrossRef7
- Captures24
- Readers24
- 24
Article Description
Background: Despite of a growing number of gemcitabine based chemoradiotherapy studies in locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC), 5-fluorouracil based regimens are still regarded to be standard and the debate of superiority between the two drugs is going on. The aim of this retrospective analysis was to evaluate the effect of two concurrent chemoradiotherapy regimens using 5-fluorouracil or gemcitabine to compare their effect and tolerance.Methods: We have performed a single centre retrospective analysis of 93 patients treated with conventionally fractionated radiotherapy of 55.8 Gray using either concurrent 5-fluorouracil, 1 g/m on days 1-5 and 29-33 of radiotherapy and 10 mg/m of mitomycin C on day 1, 29 of radiotherapy (FM group, 35 patients) versus gemcitabine (300 mg/m) and cisplatin, (30 mg/m) on days 1, 8, 22, and 29 (GC group, 58 patients). Primary endpoint was the median overall survival (OS) rate.Results: The median OS rate was 12.7 months in the GC group and 9.7 months in the FM group. The 1-year OS rate was 53% versus 40%, respectively (p = 0.009). GC led to more grade 3 leukocytopenia and thrombocytopenia than FM, but not to more grade 4 myelosuppression. Thrombocytopenia was the most frequently observed grade 4 toxicity in both groups (11% after FM versus 12% after GC). No grade 3/4 febrile neutropenia was observed. Grade 3 nausea was more common in the FM group (20% versus 9%) and grade 4 nausea was observed in one patient per group only.Conclusions: GC was superior to FM for overall survival and both regimens were similar in terms of tolerance. We conclude that GC leads to encouraging results and that the use of FM for chemoradiotherapy in LAPC cannot be recommended without concerns. © 2011 Brunner et al; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=79960692561&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717x-6-88; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21794119; http://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1748-717X-6-88; https://ro-journal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1748-717X-6-88; https://dx.doi.org/10.1186/1748-717x-6-88
Springer Nature
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know