Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display - Cocktail

316 - Efficacy and safety of S‑1‑based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in colorectal cancer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials


24 Nov 2018


Poster display - Cocktail


Tumour Site

Colon and Rectal Cancer


Zhan Wang


Annals of Oncology (2018) 29 (suppl_9): ix28-ix45. 10.1093/annonc/mdy431


Z. Wang1, Y.S. Zang1, X.L. Liu2, G.M. Zhang2, G.L. Cheng2

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Medical Oncology, Changzheng Hospital, 200070 - Shanghai/CN
  • 2 Department Of Medicine, National chiral pharmaceutical engineering technology research center, 276000 - Linyi/CN


Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 316


A series of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing S-1 with 5-FU or capecitabine in mono or combined therapy for colorectal cancer (CRC). The meta-analysis aims to compare the efficacy and safety profile of S-1-based versus non- S-1-based chemotherapy as first-line treatment in CRC.


Relevant RCTs were obtained from PubMed, Embase, Ovid databases and the Cochrane library from database set up to May 2018. The included studies were selected according to eligibility criteria. The study design, participant characteristics, interventions, and outcomes were abstracted after the assessment of methodological quality of the trials. All data were analyzed by Review Manager 5.3.


10 RCTs were included in meta-analysis, involving 1356 and 1365 patients in S-1 and non- S-1-based chemotherapy. Meta-analysis showed that S-1-based chemotherapy significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) (HR 0.90, 95% CI: 0.84-0.97, P = 0.006). In subgroup analysis, there was statistically significant increase in PFS when S-1-based chemotherapy was compared to 5-FU-based (HR 0.92, 95% CI 0.84–1.00, P = 0.04) or capecitabine-based chemotherapy (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.73–0.99, P = 0.04). The meta-analysis of overall survival (OS) (P = 0.36), overall response rate (ORR) (P = 0.90), disease control rate (DCR) (P = 0.13) showed no statistical significance between S-1-based and non- S-1-based chemotherapy. The statistically significant differences in the meta-analysis indicated less incidence of graded 3-4 leucopenia(OR = 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13-0.71, P = 0.006) and hand-foot syndrome (HFS)(OR = 0.24, 95% CI: 0.10-0.58, P = 0.001) in the S-1-based chemotherapy, and there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of grade 3-4 diarrhea, nausea/vomit, fatigue, stomatitis, sensory neuropathy, gastrointestinal perforation between two groups.


S-1-based chemotherapy had longer PFS and better safety than 5-FU-based or capecitabine-based chemotherapy, and S-1-based chemotherapy in mono or combined therapy was an attractive alternative to standard first-line regimen for patients of CRC, but further investigations in larger populations would be needed to confirm it.

Editorial acknowledgement

Clinical trial identification

Legal entity responsible for the study

Zhan Wang.


Has not received any funding.


All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.