Retrospective Analysis of the Safety of FOLFOX Compared to CAPOX for Adjuvant Treatment of Stage III Colorectal Cancer in Newfoundland Patients

IF 0.9 Q4 GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY
Josh N. McShane, D. Armstrong
{"title":"Retrospective Analysis of the Safety of FOLFOX Compared to CAPOX for Adjuvant Treatment of Stage III Colorectal Cancer in Newfoundland Patients","authors":"Josh N. McShane, D. Armstrong","doi":"10.3390/gidisord4030020","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and infusional 5-fluouracil, folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) are the two chemotherapy regimens in current clinical use for the adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). Many centers in Newfoundland lack the resources to support the home infusion program required for FOLFOX, leaving CAPOX as the sole treatment option. This study aimed to review if Newfoundland patients receiving CAPOX experience greater treatment-induced toxicities. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of 93 Stage III CRC patients. The frequency and severity of toxicities, healthcare resource utilization, and treatment completion rates were compared between the two treatment options. Results: Grade 3 diarrhea and grade 1 or 2 nausea/vomiting were more common in CAPOX compared to FOLFOX-treated patients (26.9% versus 2.99%, p = 0.002; 61.5% versus 31.8%; p = 0.048, respectively). Grade 1 or 2 mucositis was more common with FOLFOX (35.8% versus 3.9%, p = 0.002). CAPOX was associated with higher rates of severe toxicity (53.9% versus 25.4%, p = 0.009), while rates of grade 1 and 2 toxicities were not significantly different between groups. CAPOX-treated patients were greater than twice as likely to require emergency department treatment secondary to toxicity (mean 0.692 visits per patient versus 0.313 in FOLFOX patients, p < 0.001) and the proportion of patients that were hospitalized secondary to CAPOX toxicity was greater. Significantly more FOLFOX patients were able to finish their prescribed treatment plans compared to CAPOX patients (89.5% versus 53.8%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Compared to FOLFOX-treated patients, CAPOX patients are more likely to experience toxicities of greater severity, require emergency services secondary to treatment-related toxicity, and to discontinue therapy. This reflects a reduced standard of care that may decrease patient safety and quality of life.","PeriodicalId":73131,"journal":{"name":"Gastrointestinal disorders (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-09-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gastrointestinal disorders (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/gidisord4030020","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"GASTROENTEROLOGY & HEPATOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CAPOX) and infusional 5-fluouracil, folinic acid, and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) are the two chemotherapy regimens in current clinical use for the adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer (CRC). Many centers in Newfoundland lack the resources to support the home infusion program required for FOLFOX, leaving CAPOX as the sole treatment option. This study aimed to review if Newfoundland patients receiving CAPOX experience greater treatment-induced toxicities. Methods: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of 93 Stage III CRC patients. The frequency and severity of toxicities, healthcare resource utilization, and treatment completion rates were compared between the two treatment options. Results: Grade 3 diarrhea and grade 1 or 2 nausea/vomiting were more common in CAPOX compared to FOLFOX-treated patients (26.9% versus 2.99%, p = 0.002; 61.5% versus 31.8%; p = 0.048, respectively). Grade 1 or 2 mucositis was more common with FOLFOX (35.8% versus 3.9%, p = 0.002). CAPOX was associated with higher rates of severe toxicity (53.9% versus 25.4%, p = 0.009), while rates of grade 1 and 2 toxicities were not significantly different between groups. CAPOX-treated patients were greater than twice as likely to require emergency department treatment secondary to toxicity (mean 0.692 visits per patient versus 0.313 in FOLFOX patients, p < 0.001) and the proportion of patients that were hospitalized secondary to CAPOX toxicity was greater. Significantly more FOLFOX patients were able to finish their prescribed treatment plans compared to CAPOX patients (89.5% versus 53.8%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: Compared to FOLFOX-treated patients, CAPOX patients are more likely to experience toxicities of greater severity, require emergency services secondary to treatment-related toxicity, and to discontinue therapy. This reflects a reduced standard of care that may decrease patient safety and quality of life.
FOLFOX与CAPOX辅助治疗纽芬兰癌症III期结直肠癌的安全性回顾性分析
背景:卡培他滨和奥沙利铂(CAPOX)以及输注5-氟尿嘧啶、亚叶酸和奥沙利拉丁(FOLFOX)是目前临床上辅助治疗癌症(CRC)的两种化疗方案。纽芬兰的许多中心缺乏资源来支持FOLFOX所需的家庭输液计划,使CAPOX成为唯一的治疗选择。本研究旨在审查接受CAPOX治疗的纽芬兰患者是否经历了更大的治疗诱导毒性。方法:对93例III期CRC患者进行多中心回顾性队列研究。比较两种治疗方案的毒性发生频率和严重程度、医疗资源利用率和治疗完成率。结果:与FOLFOX治疗的患者相比,CAPOX的3级腹泻和1或2级恶心/呕吐更常见(分别为26.9%和2.99%,p=0.002;61.5%和31.8%;p=0.048)。FOLFOX的1级或2级粘膜炎更常见(35.8%对3.9%,p=0.002)。CAPOX的严重毒性发生率较高(53.9%对25.4%,p=0.009),而1级和2级毒性发生率在各组之间没有显著差异。接受CAPOX治疗的患者因毒性而需要急诊科治疗的可能性是其他患者的两倍多(平均每位患者就诊0.692次,而FOLFOX患者就诊0.313次,p<0.001),因CAPOX毒性而住院的患者比例更高。与CAPOX患者相比,能够完成处方治疗计划的FOLFOX患者明显更多(89.5%对53.8%;p<0.001)。结论:与接受FOLFOX治疗的患者相比,CAPOX患者更有可能经历更严重的毒性,需要治疗相关毒性后的紧急服务,并停止治疗。这反映了护理标准的降低,可能会降低患者的安全和生活质量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信