No abstract available.
Cisplatin ; Hyperpigmentation* ; Capecitabine

No abstract available.
Capecitabine ; Constriction, Pathologic ; Nasolacrimal Duct

No abstract available.
Capecitabine ; Colon ; Colonic Neoplasms ; Deoxycytidine ; Fluorouracil ; Humans

Hand-foot syndrome, also known as acral erythema, is a distinctive and relatively common toxic reaction due to some anticancer drugs. It is characterized by a painful erythema on the palms and soles during chemotherapy, which is often preceeded by paresthesia. We report two cases of hand-foot syndrome induced by capecitabine, which is a relatively brand-new oral anticancer agent. Hand-foot syndrome is one of the most common complications of capecitabine, and is on the increase. Therefore, dermatologists should be aware of it.
Drug Therapy ; Erythema ; Hand-Foot Syndrome* ; Paresthesia ; Capecitabine

No abstract available.
Administration, Metronomic ; Aged* ; Capecitabine* ; Colorectal Neoplasms* ; Drug Therapy* ; Humans

INTRODUCTION: XELOX is non-inferior to FOLFOX-4 as a first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. This study compares the costs associated with XEL0X+/-bevacizumab versus FOLFOX4+/-bevacizumab in a non-reimbursed, out of pocket Philippine health care system.
METHODS: This is a cost-minimization analysis using Philippine General Hospital as base case and a typical Filipino patient of 60 kg with BSA 1.66. The outcome data were derived from the N016966 trial. These included the drugs capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin, and bevacizumab (BEV); chemotherapy cycles and corresponding hospital admission for each regimen; resources associated with treatment of adverse events such hospital days, ambulatory consultations, concomitant
medication, and central venous line insertion/removal, with costs and charges based on the local setting.
RESULTS: Highest cost (direct and/or indirect) was for FOLFOX4+BEV, followed by XEL0X+BEV, FOLFOX4, and then XELOX. The use of XELOX resulted in a cost saving of PhP 158,642 per patient compared with FOLFOX4. The use of XEL0X+BEV resulted in a cost saving of PhP 186,144 per patient compared with FOLFOX4+BEV.
CONCLUSION: XEL0X+/-BEV is less costly than FOLFOX4-F/-BEV in an out-of-pocket Philippine tertiary hospital setting from the patient's perspective.

PURPOSE: To assess the clinico-pathologic characteristics associated with pathologic complete remission (pCR) after preoperative chemoradiotherapy (PCRT) for rectal cancer and evaluate predictive factors for pCR and prognostic impact of pCR. METHODS: We analyzed 325 patients who underwent PCRT and surgical resection between September 1999 and September 2006. We have treated 319 patients with PCRT for locally advanced rectal cancer and 6 patients for sphincter-saving procedure. Chemotherapy consisted of either of bolus 5-FU (325 mg/m2/d) or capecitabine (1,650 mg/m2/d) for the duration of radiation and after surgery. Radiation therapy was delivered and surgery was performed 4~6 weeks following the completion of PCRT. We compared pCR patients with non-pCR patients according to the clinico-pathologic characteristics and followed up with a median of 32 (range, 12~91) months. RESULTS: The pCR (n=41, 12.6%) and non-pCR (n=284) groups were comparable in age, sex, location of the tumor, chemotherapy regimen, pre-CRT CEA level except pre-CRT clinical stage (12.2% vs. 0.4% in stage I, P= 0.047). There was no significant difference in genetic characteristics between groups. There was no specific predictive factors for pCR except pre-CRT T category (pCR in T2 (5/8, 62.5%) vs. T3 (33/283, 11.7%) or T4 (3/33, 9.1%), P=0.001). The 3-year disease free survival (DFS) was 100% and 83.6% in the pCR and non-pCR group respectively (P=0.012). There were 5 local and 34 systemic recurrences only in non-pCR group. CONCLUSIONS: Rectal cancer patients with pCR after PCRT have an excellent prognosis and are unlikely to fail locally or systemically because of the effect of stage. However there was no specific predictive factor for pCR except preoperative T category.
Capecitabine ; Chemoradiotherapy ; Deoxycytidine ; Disease-Free Survival ; Fluorouracil ; Humans ; Polymerase Chain Reaction ; Prognosis ; Rectal Neoplasms ; Recurrence

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine whether the ERCC1 expression is effective to predict the clinical outcomes of patients with advanced gastric cancer (AGC) and who were treated with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 89 measurable AGC patients received cisplatin and capecitabine, with or without epirubicin, as a part of a randomized phase II study. Patients were included for the current molecular analysis if they had received two or more cycles of chemotherapy, their objective tumor responses were measured and if their paraffin-embedded tumor samples were available. The ERCC1 expression was examined by performing immunohistochemical (IHC) staining, and the patients were divided into two groups (positive or negative) according to the presence of IHC staining of the tumor cell nuclei. RESULTS: Of the 32 eligible patients, 21 patients (66%) had tumor with a positive expression of ERCC1 and the remaining 11 patients had tumor with a negative ERCC1-expression. The ERCC1-negative patients achieved a higher response rate than that of the ERCC1-positive patients (44% vs. 28%, respectively), although the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.42). The median survival time for the all patients was 14.6 months (95% CI: 13.6 to 15.6 months). The one-year survival rate was similar for the ERCC1-negative patients (61%) and the ERCC1-positive patients (70%). CONCLUSION: In the current study, the tumor ERCC1 expression by IHC staining could not predict the clinical response or survival of AGC patients who were treated with cisplatin-based first-line chemotherapy. The ERCC1 protein expression does not appear to be a useful tool for the selection of tailored chemotherapy for these patients.
Cell Nucleus ; Cisplatin ; Deoxycytidine ; Epirubicin ; Fluorouracil ; Humans ; Stomach Neoplasms ; Survival Rate ; Capecitabine

PURPOSE: This study evaluated the re-challenge of S-1 or cisplatin in combination with docetaxel in metastatic gastric cancer (MGC) that had progressed on a cisplatin plus either S-1 or capecitabine regimen. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with progressive disease after first-line cisplatin plus S-1 or capecitabine were randomized to receive 3-week cycles of docetaxel 75 mg/m² intravenously (IV) on D1 (D), docetaxel 60 mg/m² IV plus cisplatin 60 mg/m² IV on D1 (DC), or docetaxel 60 mg/m2 IV D1 plus oral S-1 30 mg/m² twice a day on D1-14 (DS). RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were randomized to the D (n=23), DC (n=24), or DS (n=25) group. The confirmed response rate was 4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0% to 12.6%), 4.3% (95% CI, 0% to 12.6%), and 8.7% (95% CI, 0% to 20.2%) for the D, DC, and DS groups, respectively. Compared to the D arm, the DS arm had a better progression-free survival (2.7 months vs. 1.3 months, p=0.034) without any deterioration in safety or quality of life, whereas the DC arm had a similar progression-free survival (1.8 months vs. 1.3 months, p=0.804) and poorer overall survival (5.6 months vs. 10.0 months, p=0.035). CONCLUSION: A re-challenge with S-1, but not cisplatin, in combination with docetaxel has potential anticancer benefits over docetaxel alone in MGC with progression after prior cisplatin plus S-1 or capecitabine.
Antineoplastic Agents ; Arm ; Capecitabine* ; Cisplatin* ; Disease-Free Survival ; Drug Therapy* ; Humans ; Quality of Life ; Stomach Neoplasms*

PURPOSE: Despite advances in rectal cancer treatment over the last decade, local control and risk of late side effects due to external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) remain as concerns. The present study aimed to investigate the efficacy and the safety of low-dose-rate endorectal brachytherapy (LDRBT) as a boost to neoadjuvant chemoradiation for use in treating locally advanced distal rectal adenocarcinomas. METHODS: This phase-II clinical trial included 34 patients (as the study arm) with newly diagnosed, locally advanced (clinical T3-T4 and/or N1/N2, M0) lower rectal cancer. For comparative analysis, 102 matched patients (as the historical control arm) with rectal cancer were also selected. All the patients were treated with LDRBT (15 Gy in 3 fractions) and concurrent chemoradiation (45-50.4 Gy). Concurrent chemotherapy consisted of oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 plus oral capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily during LDRBT and EBRT. RESULTS: The study results revealed a significant differences between the study arm and the control arm in terms in the pathologic tumor size (2.1 cm vs. 3.6 cm, P = 0.001), the pathologic tumor stage (35% T3-4 vs. 65% T3-4, P = 0.003), and the pathologic complete response (29.4% vs. 11.7%, P < 0.028). Moreover, a significantly higher dose of EBRT (P = 0.041) was found in the control arm, and a longer time to surgery was observed in the study arm (P < 0.001). The higher rate of treatment-related toxicities, such as mild proctitis and anemia, in the study arm was tolerable and easily manageable. CONCLUSION: A boost of LDRBT can optimize the pathologic complete response, with acceptable toxicities, in patients with distal rectal cancer.
Adenocarcinoma ; Anemia ; Arm ; Brachytherapy* ; Drug Therapy ; Humans ; Neoadjuvant Therapy ; Proctitis ; Rectal Neoplasms* ; Capecitabine