IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0164663.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Capecitabine in Combination with Standard (Neo)Adjuvant Regimens in Early Breast Cancer: Survival Outcome from a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Author

Listed:
  • Ze-Chun Zhang
  • Qi-Ni Xu
  • Sui-Ling Lin
  • Xu-Yuan Li

Abstract

Capecitabine has been investigated in early breast cancer in several studies, but it was undefined that whether it could improve survival. To investigate whether the addition of capecitabine affected survival in patients with early breast cancer, a meta-analysis was conducted and overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and toxicity were assessed. The PubMed, Embase databases and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched for studies between January 2006 and April 2016. Hazard ratios (HRs) with their 95% confidence intervals (CIs), or data for calculating HRs with 95% CI were derived. Seven trials with 9097 patients, consisted of 4 adjuvant and 3 neoadjuvant studies, were included in this meta-analysis. Adding capecitabine showed no improvement in DFS (HR = 0.93; 95% CI, 0.85–1.02; P = 0.12), whereas a significant improvement in OS was observed (HR = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.75–0.96; P = 0.008). A sub-analysis of DFS showed that benefit of capecitabine derived from patients with triple negative subtype and with extensive axillary involvement. Safety profiles were consistent with the known side-effects of capecitabine, but more patients discontinued scheduled treatment in the capecitabine group. Combining capecitabine with standard (neo)adjuvant regimens in early breast cancer demonstrated a significantly superior OS, and indicated DFS improvement in some subtypes with high risk of recurrence. Selection of subtypes was a key to identify patients who might gain survival benefit from capecitabine.

Suggested Citation

  • Ze-Chun Zhang & Qi-Ni Xu & Sui-Ling Lin & Xu-Yuan Li, 2016. "Capecitabine in Combination with Standard (Neo)Adjuvant Regimens in Early Breast Cancer: Survival Outcome from a Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(10), pages 1-10, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0164663
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0164663
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0164663
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0164663&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0164663?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Qiuyun Li & Yi Jiang & Wei Wei & Huawei Yang & Jianlun Liu, 2013. "Clinical Efficacy of Including Capecitabine in Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(1), pages 1-6, January.
    2. Yiwei Jiang & Wenjin Yin & Liheng Zhou & Tingting Yan & Qiong Zhou & Yueyao Du & Zhenzhou Shen & Zhimin Shao & Jinsong Lu, 2012. "First Efficacy Results of Capecitabine with Anthracycline- and Taxane-Based Adjuvant Therapy in High-Risk Early Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(3), pages 1-7, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0164663. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.