Asset Details
Do you wish to reserve the book?
Oral uracil–tegafur compared with intravenous chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for resected early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer patients
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oral uracil–tegafur compared with intravenous chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for resected early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer patients
Do you wish to request the book?
Oral uracil–tegafur compared with intravenous chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for resected early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer patients
Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Journal Article
Oral uracil–tegafur compared with intravenous chemotherapy as adjuvant therapy for resected early‐stage non‐small cell lung cancer patients
2023
Overview
Studies comparing the effectiveness of either adjuvant oral uracil-tegafur (UFT) or intravenous chemotherapy on early-stage (stage I and II) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients treated with complete surgical treatment remain limited.
From January 2011 to December 2017, patients with early-stage NSCLC (defined as tumor size >3 cm without mediastinal lymph node involvement or any distant metastasis) receiving either adjuvant oral UFT or intravenous chemotherapy after surgical resection were identified from the Taiwan Cancer Registry. Overall survival (OS) and relapse-free survival (RFS) were the primary and secondary outcomes, respectively. Propensity matching was used for controlling confounders.
A total of 840 patients receiving adjuvant therapy after surgery (including 595 oral UFT and 245 intravenous chemotherapy) were enrolled. Before matching, patients using oral UFT had significantly longer OS (HR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.49-0.98, p = 0.0387) and RFS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.61-0.97, p = 0.0392) than those with intravenous chemotherapy. A matched cohort of 352 patients was created using 1:1 propensity score-matching. In the Cox regression analysis, the UFT and the matched chemotherapy groups had similar OS (HR: 0.80, 95% CI: 0.48-1.32, p = 0.3753) and RFS (HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.72-1.34, p = 0.9149). Among subgroup analysis, oral UFT use was associated with longer RFS among the subgroups of non-drinker (HR: 0.66, 95% CI: 0.34-0.99, p = 0.0478) and patients with stage IB disease (HR: 0.67, 95% CI: 0.42-0.97, p = 0.0341).
This population-based study in the real-world setting of Taiwan demonstrates comparable effectiveness between oral UFT and intravenous chemotherapy in terms of clinical outcomes for early-stage NSCLC patients after surgery.
