Publication Date: 05 Nov 2012
Type: Review
Journal: Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology
Citation: Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology 2012:6 363-373
doi: 10.4137/CMO.S8194
Large randomized trials demonstrated a benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy after resection of the primary colon cancer. It improves overall survival and reduces the risk of death, by 5% in UICC (Union Internationale Contre le Cancer) stage II and approximately 15%–20% in stage III. Fluoropyrimidines have been the standard drugs for the treatment of colon cancer since large randomized controlled trials demonstrated their efficacy and safety in treating patients suffering from this disease. Capecitabine is an orally administered fluoropyrimidine, which is preferably activated in tumor tissue to the active moiety 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and is cytotoxic through inhibition of DNA synthesis. It has proven equivalent efficacy and tolerability despite a changed toxicity profile compared to 5FU with less myelosuppression but more hand-and-foot syndrome. Capecitabine is well tolerated in elderly patients. The oral route of administration avoids frequent clinical visits as well as insertion of central venous catheters. The impact of the particular drug features on daily clinical practice is discussed in this review.
PDF (548.03 KB PDF FORMAT)
RIS citation (ENDNOTE, REFERENCE MANAGER, PROCITE, REFWORKS)
BibTex citation (BIBDESK, LATEX)
PMC HTML
I had a great experience publishing our paper in Clinical Medicine Insights: Oncology. The review was prompt and fair and once it was accepted with the revisions, the editorial office was very clear and helpful with updates on the progress at each step of the publication process. I had prompt email responses to my questions. I will definitely try to publish more papers in this journal in the future. Keep the good work. ...
All authors are surveyed after their articles are published. Authors are asked to rate their experience in a variety of areas, and their responses help us to monitor our performance. Presented here are their responses in some key areas. No 'poor' or 'very poor' responses were received; these are represented in the 'other' category.See Our Results
Copyright © 2014 Libertas Academica Ltd (except open access articles and accompanying metadata and supplementary files.)
Facebook Google+ Twitter
Pinterest Tumblr YouTube