dc.contributor.author | ŞENCAN, ORHAN | |
dc.contributor.author | Cevik, Duygu | |
dc.contributor.author | Camci, Celalettin | |
dc.contributor.author | Kilickap, Sadettin | |
dc.contributor.author | Ozdener, Fatih | |
dc.contributor.author | Buyukunal, Evin | |
dc.contributor.author | YALÇIN, ŞUAYİB | |
dc.contributor.author | Uslu, Ruchan | |
dc.contributor.author | DANE, FAYSAL | |
dc.contributor.author | Yilmaz, Ugur | |
dc.contributor.author | Zengin, Nurullah | |
dc.contributor.author | Buyukberber, Suleyman | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-03-04T10:25:37Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-03-04T10:25:37Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2013 | |
dc.identifier.citation | YALÇIN Ş., Uslu R., DANE F., Yilmaz U., Zengin N., Buyukunal E., Buyukberber S., Camci C., ŞENCAN O., Kilickap S., et al., "Bevacizumab plus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy after Initial Bevacizumab plus XELOX Treatment in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase Ill 'Stop and Go' Study Results - A Turkish Oncology Group Trial", ONCOLOGY, cilt.85, sa.6, ss.328-335, 2013 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 0030-2414 | |
dc.identifier.other | vv_1032021 | |
dc.identifier.other | av_6d2c3f1f-144c-406e-bfcf-d8dec49401cd | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12627/75421 | |
dc.identifier.uri | https://doi.org/10.1159/000355914 | |
dc.description.abstract | Objective: It was the aim of this study to evaluate maintenance therapy with bevacizumab + capecitabine following induction with bevacizumab + capecitabine + oxaliplatin (XELOX) versus bevacizumab + XELOX until progression as first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Methods: Patients received either bevacizumab (7.5 mg/kg) + XELOX (capecitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-14 + oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on day 1 every 3 weeks) until disease progression (arm A) or the same doses of bevacizumab + XELOX for 6 cycles followed by bevacizumab + capecitabine until disease progression (arm B). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Results: One hundred and twenty-three patients were randomized. Treatment compliance was similar in both groups. Median PFS was significantly longer for arm B than for arm A (11.0 vs. 8.3 months; p = 0.002). There was no significant difference between the two arms for ORR (66.7 vs. 59.0%; p = 0.861) or median OS (23.8 vs. 20.2 months; p = 0.100). Tolerability was acceptable in both treatment arms; the most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (arm B vs. arm A) were fatigue (6.6 vs. 16.1%), diarrhoea (3.3 vs. 11.3%), anorexia (3.3 vs. 11.3%), and neuropathy (1.6 vs. 8.1%). Conclusions: Maintenance therapy with bevacizumab + capecitabine can be considered an appropriate option following induction bevacizunnab + XELOX in patients with mCRC instead of continuation of bevacizumab + XELOX. (C) 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel | |
dc.language.iso | eng | |
dc.subject | Sağlık Bilimleri | |
dc.subject | İç Hastalıkları | |
dc.subject | Onkoloji | |
dc.subject | Dahili Tıp Bilimleri | |
dc.subject | Tıp | |
dc.subject | Klinik Tıp (MED) | |
dc.subject | Klinik Tıp | |
dc.subject | ONKOLOJİ | |
dc.title | Bevacizumab plus Capecitabine as Maintenance Therapy after Initial Bevacizumab plus XELOX Treatment in Previously Untreated Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: Phase Ill 'Stop and Go' Study Results - A Turkish Oncology Group Trial | |
dc.type | Makale | |
dc.relation.journal | ONCOLOGY | |
dc.contributor.department | İstanbul Üniversitesi , , | |
dc.identifier.volume | 85 | |
dc.identifier.issue | 6 | |
dc.identifier.startpage | 328 | |
dc.identifier.endpage | 335 | |
dc.contributor.firstauthorID | 207890 | |