Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2020; 8(21): 5172-5179
Published online Nov 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172
Published online Nov 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172
Table 1 Comparison of clinical data between the two groups, n %
| Clinical information | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | χ2/t | P value |
| Gender | 0.092 | 0.761 | ||
| Male | 27 (57.45) | 26 (55.32) | ||
| Female | 20 (42.55) | 21 (44.68) | ||
| Types | 0.361 | 0.548 | ||
| Squamous carcinoma | 23 (48.94) | 25 (53.19) | ||
| Adenocarcinoma | 24 (51.06) | 22 (46.81) | ||
| TNM staging | 0.130 | 0.719 | ||
| Phase IIIB | 36 (76.60) | 37 (78.72) | ||
| Phase IV | 11 (23.40) | 10 (21.28) | ||
| Age (yr) | 56.95 (4.15) | 56.17 (4.01) | 0.927 | 0.357 |
| Weight (kg) | 53.94 (3.52) | 54.09 (3.61) | 0.204 | 0.839 |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 21.14 (3.21) | 21.51 (3.45) | 0.538 | 0.592 |
Table 2 Comparison of efficacy between the two groups, n %
| Curative effect | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | χ2/t | P value |
| Complete remission | 3 (6.38) | 2 (4.26) | 0.446 | 0.504 |
| Remission | 13 (27.66) | 12 (25.53) | 0.116 | 0.733 |
| Controlled | 17 (36.17) | 18 (38.30) | 0.097 | 0.755 |
| Progressed | 14 (29.79) | 15 (31.91) | 0.105 | 0.746 |
| Total effective rate of treatment | 16 (34.04) | 14 (29.79) | 0.416 | 0.519 |
Table 3 Comparison of quality-of-life scores between the two groups
| GQOLI-74 score (point) | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | t | P value |
| Material | 60.53 (4.31) | 59.97 (4.06) | 0.648 | 0.518 |
| Society | 63.84 (3.54) | 62.59 (3.61) | 1.695 | 0.094 |
| Psychology | 67.14 (3.68) | 66.42 (3.56) | 0.964 | 0.338 |
| Body | 63.12 (3.97) | 62.47 (3.78) | 0.813 | 0.418 |
Table 4 Comparison of survival and progression-free survival between the two groups
| Follow-up results | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | t | P value |
| Progress-free survival (mo) | 6.63 (1.02) | 6.25 (0.94) | 1.878 | 0.064 |
| Survival (mo) | 13.63 (1.52) | 13.02 (1.45) | 1.991 | 0.050 |
Table 5 Comparison of toxic and side effects between the two groups, n (%)
| Toxic and side effects | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | χ2 | P value |
| Granulocytopenia | 26 (55.32) | 38 (80.85) | 14.998 | 0.001 |
| Nausea and vomiting | 20 (42.55) | 33 (70.21) | 15.555 | 0.001 |
| Diarrhea | 8 (17.02) | 23 (48.94) | 23.048 | 0.001 |
| Thrombocytopenia | 23 (48.94) | 26 (55.32) | 0.816 | 0.366 |
- Citation: Cheng XW, Leng WH, Mu CL. Efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(21): 5172-5179
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v8/i21/5172.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172