Evaluating New Treatments for Colorectal Cancer
Author Information
Author(s): Twelves C J, Cassidy J
Primary Institution: Cancer Research UK Department of Medical Oncology
Hypothesis
Which endpoints should we use in evaluating the use of novel fluoropyrimidine regimens in colorectal cancer?
Conclusion
New oral and infusional fluoropyrimidine therapies do not significantly improve overall survival compared to the standard Mayo Clinic regimen.
Supporting Evidence
- Capecitabine achieved significantly higher response rates than the Mayo Clinic regimen.
- UFT plus LV produced a lower response rate than the Mayo regimen.
- Both oral and infusional regimens demonstrated similar survival to the Mayo Clinic regimen.
- All four new therapies demonstrated superior safety profiles compared with the Mayo Clinic regimen.
Takeaway
Doctors are trying to find the best ways to treat colorectal cancer, but new medicines don't help people live longer than the old ones.
Methodology
The review compares phase III studies of oral and infusional fluoropyrimidine therapies with the Mayo Clinic regimen.
Potential Biases
Potential bias due to the lack of direct comparisons between the treatments.
Limitations
The studies reviewed did not directly compare the new regimens with each other.
Participant Demographics
Patients with advanced colorectal cancer.
Statistical Information
P-Value
p<0.0002
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website