Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis
Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting adverse event of capecitabine, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of capecitabine-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Although pyridoxine has been used for the prevention of capecitabine-associated HFS, its efficacy is controv...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Biomedical reports 2013-11, Vol.1 (6), p.873-878 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 878 |
---|---|
container_issue | 6 |
container_start_page | 873 |
container_title | Biomedical reports |
container_volume | 1 |
creator | ZHOU, YUN PENG, LING LI, YINGJIE CHEN, LIXUN |
description | Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting adverse event of capecitabine, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of capecitabine-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Although pyridoxine has been used for the prevention of capecitabine-associated HFS, its efficacy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic pyridoxine reduces the incidence of capecitabine-associated HFS by performing a meta-analysis of the literature involving available studies. Systematic searches for trials were undertaken through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, updated to March, 2013, to identify relevant studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with eligible studies that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine against capecitabine-induced HFS. We performed a meta-analysis of five studies (n=793 patients) that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine in cancer patients treated with capecitabine. The odds ratio (OR) comparing prophylactic pyridoxine to placebo was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.24] for HFS of all grades; OR=1.17 (95% CI: 0.82-1.67) for HFS ≥ grade 2 and OR=1.05 (95% CI: 0.60-1.85) for HFS ≥ grade 3. Based on our meta-analysis, prophylactic pyridoxine did not appear to reduce the incidence of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine. |
doi_str_mv | 10.3892/br.2013.161 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3916964</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A410678305</galeid><sourcerecordid>A410678305</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-9d8c2a042a2efbf5b7a43df5d1a02ffbb2401f10a386a60a803163252f1123b3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptks1rFDEYxgdRbKk9eZeAIEKZNV-TnXgQlmJVKOih9_Dmq5syk4zJjHb_e7NsXa2YHPIm-T1PSPI0zUuCV6yX9J3OK4oJWxFBnjSnFHPZSs7p02PN-ElzXsodrk2uMe36580J5YJLzLvT5v5bTtN2N4CZg0HTLgeb7kN06CcUFNOMQA8OzQllZxdTq61DIZpgXayz5JGByZkwg66iNsQ9ZNEWom19qvKyizan0b1HGzS6GVqIMOxKKC-aZx6G4s4fxrPm5urjzeXn9vrrpy-Xm-vWcLaeW2l7QwFzCtR57Tu9Bs6s7ywBTL3XmnJMPMHAegECQ48ZEYx21BNCmWZnzYeD7bTo0Vnj4pxhUFMOI-SdShDU450Ytuo2_VBMEiEFrwZvHwxy-r64MqsxFOOGAaJLS1Gkp6KTVDJS0df_oHdpyfW-lZIMS9YxIf5QtzA4FaJP9VyzN1UbTrBY9wx3lVr9h6rdujGYFJ0Pdf2R4OIgMDmVkp0_3pFgtY-K0lnto6JqVCr96u9nObK_g1GBNwegTPUvayjKkdG5xaTFosX9mrFf_DvF4A</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1930935366</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis</title><source>Spandidos Publications Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>ZHOU, YUN ; PENG, LING ; LI, YINGJIE ; CHEN, LIXUN</creator><creatorcontrib>ZHOU, YUN ; PENG, LING ; LI, YINGJIE ; CHEN, LIXUN</creatorcontrib><description>Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting adverse event of capecitabine, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of capecitabine-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Although pyridoxine has been used for the prevention of capecitabine-associated HFS, its efficacy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic pyridoxine reduces the incidence of capecitabine-associated HFS by performing a meta-analysis of the literature involving available studies. Systematic searches for trials were undertaken through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, updated to March, 2013, to identify relevant studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with eligible studies that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine against capecitabine-induced HFS. We performed a meta-analysis of five studies (n=793 patients) that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine in cancer patients treated with capecitabine. The odds ratio (OR) comparing prophylactic pyridoxine to placebo was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.24] for HFS of all grades; OR=1.17 (95% CI: 0.82-1.67) for HFS ≥ grade 2 and OR=1.05 (95% CI: 0.60-1.85) for HFS ≥ grade 3. Based on our meta-analysis, prophylactic pyridoxine did not appear to reduce the incidence of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine.</description><identifier>ISSN: 2049-9434</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 2049-9442</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.3892/br.2013.161</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24649045</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: D.A. Spandidos</publisher><subject>Activities of daily living ; Bias ; Cancer ; Cancer therapies ; Capecitabine ; Chemotherapy ; Clinical trials ; Complications and side effects ; Confidence intervals ; Dosage and administration ; Edema ; Effectiveness ; Feet ; hand-foot syndrome ; Incidence ; Libraries ; Meta-analysis ; Pain ; Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia ; Patients ; prophylactic ; Pyridoxine ; Quality ; Risk factors ; Studies ; Toxicity</subject><ispartof>Biomedical reports, 2013-11, Vol.1 (6), p.873-878</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2013, Spandidos Publications</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2013 Spandidos Publications</rights><rights>Copyright Spandidos Publications UK Ltd. 2013</rights><rights>Copyright © 2013, Spandidos Publications 2013</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-9d8c2a042a2efbf5b7a43df5d1a02ffbb2401f10a386a60a803163252f1123b3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-9d8c2a042a2efbf5b7a43df5d1a02ffbb2401f10a386a60a803163252f1123b3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916964/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3916964/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,5571,27924,27925,53791,53793</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24649045$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>ZHOU, YUN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PENG, LING</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LI, YINGJIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, LIXUN</creatorcontrib><title>Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis</title><title>Biomedical reports</title><addtitle>Biomed Rep</addtitle><description>Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting adverse event of capecitabine, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of capecitabine-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Although pyridoxine has been used for the prevention of capecitabine-associated HFS, its efficacy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic pyridoxine reduces the incidence of capecitabine-associated HFS by performing a meta-analysis of the literature involving available studies. Systematic searches for trials were undertaken through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, updated to March, 2013, to identify relevant studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with eligible studies that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine against capecitabine-induced HFS. We performed a meta-analysis of five studies (n=793 patients) that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine in cancer patients treated with capecitabine. The odds ratio (OR) comparing prophylactic pyridoxine to placebo was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.24] for HFS of all grades; OR=1.17 (95% CI: 0.82-1.67) for HFS ≥ grade 2 and OR=1.05 (95% CI: 0.60-1.85) for HFS ≥ grade 3. Based on our meta-analysis, prophylactic pyridoxine did not appear to reduce the incidence of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine.</description><subject>Activities of daily living</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Cancer</subject><subject>Cancer therapies</subject><subject>Capecitabine</subject><subject>Chemotherapy</subject><subject>Clinical trials</subject><subject>Complications and side effects</subject><subject>Confidence intervals</subject><subject>Dosage and administration</subject><subject>Edema</subject><subject>Effectiveness</subject><subject>Feet</subject><subject>hand-foot syndrome</subject><subject>Incidence</subject><subject>Libraries</subject><subject>Meta-analysis</subject><subject>Pain</subject><subject>Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia</subject><subject>Patients</subject><subject>prophylactic</subject><subject>Pyridoxine</subject><subject>Quality</subject><subject>Risk factors</subject><subject>Studies</subject><subject>Toxicity</subject><issn>2049-9434</issn><issn>2049-9442</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2013</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNptks1rFDEYxgdRbKk9eZeAIEKZNV-TnXgQlmJVKOih9_Dmq5syk4zJjHb_e7NsXa2YHPIm-T1PSPI0zUuCV6yX9J3OK4oJWxFBnjSnFHPZSs7p02PN-ElzXsodrk2uMe36580J5YJLzLvT5v5bTtN2N4CZg0HTLgeb7kN06CcUFNOMQA8OzQllZxdTq61DIZpgXayz5JGByZkwg66iNsQ9ZNEWom19qvKyizan0b1HGzS6GVqIMOxKKC-aZx6G4s4fxrPm5urjzeXn9vrrpy-Xm-vWcLaeW2l7QwFzCtR57Tu9Bs6s7ywBTL3XmnJMPMHAegECQ48ZEYx21BNCmWZnzYeD7bTo0Vnj4pxhUFMOI-SdShDU450Ytuo2_VBMEiEFrwZvHwxy-r64MqsxFOOGAaJLS1Gkp6KTVDJS0df_oHdpyfW-lZIMS9YxIf5QtzA4FaJP9VyzN1UbTrBY9wx3lVr9h6rdujGYFJ0Pdf2R4OIgMDmVkp0_3pFgtY-K0lnto6JqVCr96u9nObK_g1GBNwegTPUvayjKkdG5xaTFosX9mrFf_DvF4A</recordid><startdate>20131101</startdate><enddate>20131101</enddate><creator>ZHOU, YUN</creator><creator>PENG, LING</creator><creator>LI, YINGJIE</creator><creator>CHEN, LIXUN</creator><general>D.A. Spandidos</general><general>Spandidos Publications</general><general>Spandidos Publications UK Ltd</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FG</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ARAPS</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BGLVJ</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P5Z</scope><scope>P62</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20131101</creationdate><title>Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis</title><author>ZHOU, YUN ; PENG, LING ; LI, YINGJIE ; CHEN, LIXUN</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-9d8c2a042a2efbf5b7a43df5d1a02ffbb2401f10a386a60a803163252f1123b3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2013</creationdate><topic>Activities of daily living</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Cancer</topic><topic>Cancer therapies</topic><topic>Capecitabine</topic><topic>Chemotherapy</topic><topic>Clinical trials</topic><topic>Complications and side effects</topic><topic>Confidence intervals</topic><topic>Dosage and administration</topic><topic>Edema</topic><topic>Effectiveness</topic><topic>Feet</topic><topic>hand-foot syndrome</topic><topic>Incidence</topic><topic>Libraries</topic><topic>Meta-analysis</topic><topic>Pain</topic><topic>Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia</topic><topic>Patients</topic><topic>prophylactic</topic><topic>Pyridoxine</topic><topic>Quality</topic><topic>Risk factors</topic><topic>Studies</topic><topic>Toxicity</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>ZHOU, YUN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PENG, LING</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>LI, YINGJIE</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>CHEN, LIXUN</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Technology Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Technology Collection</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Advanced Technologies & Aerospace Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Biomedical reports</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>ZHOU, YUN</au><au>PENG, LING</au><au>LI, YINGJIE</au><au>CHEN, LIXUN</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Biomedical reports</jtitle><addtitle>Biomed Rep</addtitle><date>2013-11-01</date><risdate>2013</risdate><volume>1</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>873</spage><epage>878</epage><pages>873-878</pages><issn>2049-9434</issn><eissn>2049-9442</eissn><abstract>Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting adverse event of capecitabine, which commonly leads to early discontinuation of capecitabine-based therapy in the palliative and adjuvant settings. Although pyridoxine has been used for the prevention of capecitabine-associated HFS, its efficacy is controversial. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether prophylactic pyridoxine reduces the incidence of capecitabine-associated HFS by performing a meta-analysis of the literature involving available studies. Systematic searches for trials were undertaken through PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) and the ASCO Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium, updated to March, 2013, to identify relevant studies. A meta-analysis was conducted with eligible studies that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine against capecitabine-induced HFS. We performed a meta-analysis of five studies (n=793 patients) that evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic use of pyridoxine in cancer patients treated with capecitabine. The odds ratio (OR) comparing prophylactic pyridoxine to placebo was 0.91 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.67-1.24] for HFS of all grades; OR=1.17 (95% CI: 0.82-1.67) for HFS ≥ grade 2 and OR=1.05 (95% CI: 0.60-1.85) for HFS ≥ grade 3. Based on our meta-analysis, prophylactic pyridoxine did not appear to reduce the incidence of HFS in patients receiving capecitabine.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>D.A. Spandidos</pub><pmid>24649045</pmid><doi>10.3892/br.2013.161</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 2049-9434 |
ispartof | Biomedical reports, 2013-11, Vol.1 (6), p.873-878 |
issn | 2049-9434 2049-9442 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3916964 |
source | Spandidos Publications Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
subjects | Activities of daily living Bias Cancer Cancer therapies Capecitabine Chemotherapy Clinical trials Complications and side effects Confidence intervals Dosage and administration Edema Effectiveness Feet hand-foot syndrome Incidence Libraries Meta-analysis Pain Palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia Patients prophylactic Pyridoxine Quality Risk factors Studies Toxicity |
title | Prophylactic pyridoxine was not able to reduce the incidence of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome: A meta-analysis |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-21T15%3A31%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Prophylactic%20pyridoxine%20was%20not%20able%20to%20reduce%20the%20incidence%20of%20capecitabine-induced%20hand-foot%20syndrome:%20A%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Biomedical%20reports&rft.au=ZHOU,%20YUN&rft.date=2013-11-01&rft.volume=1&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=873&rft.epage=878&rft.pages=873-878&rft.issn=2049-9434&rft.eissn=2049-9442&rft_id=info:doi/10.3892/br.2013.161&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA410678305%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1930935366&rft_id=info:pmid/24649045&rft_galeid=A410678305&rfr_iscdi=true |