Abstract 148P
Background
The purpose of this study was to compare Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin (XELOX) with S-1, based on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) in gastric cancer (GC). In addition, clinical impact of using lymph node ratios and compare it with N stage was investigated.
Methods
Patients who had curative resection and received either S-1 or XELOX as adjuvant chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer between Jan, 2011 and Dec, 2015, were analysed. Of the 412 patients enrolled, 301 received S-1 and 111 received XELOX. Lymph node ratio (LNR) groups were segregated as 0, 0-0.1, 0.1-0.25, and > 0.25 and named LNR 0,1,2 and 3, respectively. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to minimize the influence of potential selection bias. The PSM compared DFS and OS in the two treatment groups, and enabled subgroup analysis according to clinical variables including the lymph node ratio group (LNR group) and N stage.
Results
In PSM cohort, the sample size of each group was 86 patients and variables are well balanced. The XELOX group showed significantly better DFS (26.9% vs 59.3%, HR 0.43, 95% CI 0.20-0.90; p = 0.025) and better OS(30.8% vs 63.0%, HR 0.44, 95% CI 0.20-0.99; 0.045) in stage IIIC. The XELOX group showed significantly better DFS in all stage III. (54.7% vs 61.6%, HR 0.57 ,95% CI 0.33-0.99; p = 0.045). The N3 group showed significantly better DFS (40% vs 65.8%, HR 0.45, 95% CI, 0.23-0.86; p = 0.017) and better OS (44.7% vs 68.4%, HR 0.48, 95% CI, 0.24-0.97; p = 0.040) in the XELOX group. The LNR 3 group showed significantly better DFS in the XELOX group (26.3% vs 52.9% with HR 0.41 (95% CI, 0.17-0.97; p = 0.042).
Conclusions
Our data suggested that current N staging and LNR could be a useful tool for selecting patients who can benefit from adjuvant XELOX after D2 gastrectomy when compared with S-1. When patients who are designated N3 or LNR > 0.25 or at stage IIIC, XELOX should be recommended over S-1.
Clinical trial identification
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
The authors.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
397P - Development of prediction model for hepatocellular carcinoma in chronic hepatitis B patients
Presenter: Teerapat Ungtrakul
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
398P - Planning for future cancer control programs in Uganda: Projections of top five cancers’ incidence in the next decade
Presenter: Judith Asasira
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
399P - Prevalence of colorectal cancer risk factors in apparently healthy adults in Suluhan Village, Bali
Presenter: Cindy Trisina
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
400P - Female lung cancer: Emerging issue in Bangladesh
Presenter: Muhammad Rafiqul Islam
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
402P - Work-related outcomes among cancer survivors in Singapore
Presenter: Chia Jie Tan
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
407P - Focal treatments for metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (mSTS) is associated with improved overall survival
Presenter: Ching Tso Chen
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
408P - The Asian sarcoma consortium sarcoma preceptorship program: A program evaluation study utilizing the Kirkpatrick model (Level 1 and 2)
Presenter: Fernando Gracieux Jr.
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
409P - Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis revealed mutagenic patterns of dedifferentiated liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma in Chinese patients
Presenter: Yuhong Zhou
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
410P - Treatment patterns and outcomes of elderly patients with metastatic soft tissue sarcomas (mSTS)
Presenter: Yu-ju Kuo
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract
411P - Comparative analysis of protein profiles of prognosis-associated proteins and KIT-related proteins in gastrointestinal stromal tumour
Presenter: Yoshiyuki Suehara
Session: Poster display session
Resources:
Abstract