Comparison of adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) versus S-1 after gastrectomy: a population-based cohort study using a nationwide claims database

3Citations
Citations of this article
5Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Although both capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and S-1 are accepted as adjuvant chemotherapy following gastrectomy for gastric cancer, the better option between the two is still controversial. We conducted a retrospective nationwide cohort study using data from the National Health Insurance Service of Korea. We included patients who underwent gastrectomy for a primary diagnosis of gastric cancer between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2018. The study compared the survival outcomes of patients who received postoperative chemotherapy based on S-1 (Arm S) vs. CAPOX (Arm C), as well as other relevant clinical variables such as comorbidity and completion of planned treatment. A total of 6602 patients were included in the analysis, with 4199 in Arm S and 2403 in Arm C. After propensity score matching, the final study population consisted of 2067 patients in each arm. Arm C showed statistically inferior 5-year overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS) rates compared to Arm S (84.0% vs. 90.0%; p < 0.0001; and 78.4% vs. 86.1%; p < 0.0001). Age (65 ≥ vs. < 65) and the incomplete planned treatment also had a significant negative effect on both OS and DFS. In the multivariable analysis, Arm C still showed worse OS (hazard ratio [HR], 1.609; 95% confidence intervals [CI], 1.339–1.934; p < 0.0001) and DFS (HR, 1.552; 95% CI 1.333–1.807; p < 0.0001) than Arm S. Both S-1 and CAPOX showed excellent efficacy, but this nationwide cohort study suggests that S-1 may be a better option in certain clinical situations.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Maeng, C. H., Kim, H., & Kim, M. (2023). Comparison of adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) versus S-1 after gastrectomy: a population-based cohort study using a nationwide claims database. Scientific Reports, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-44117-3

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free