Comparison of 5-FU versus capecitabine in combination with mitomycin or cisplatin in the treatment of anal cancer.

Authors

null

Irene S. Yu

British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Irene S. Yu , Winson Y. Cheung

Organizations

British Columbia Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada, Department of Medical Oncology, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, BC, Canada

Research Funding

Other

Background: Capecitabine is used as an alternative fluoropyrimidine to infusional 5-FU in the non-operative management of anal cancer due to its ease of administration. However, its patterns of use and long-term outcomes in the real world are poorly described. Our objectives were to determine the frequency of capecitabine use, compare the difference in outcomes, and examine the difference in treatment-related adverse events between oral and intravenous fluoropyrimidines. Methods: All anal cancer patients who received either capecitabine or infusional 5-FU as part of their curative intent chemoradiotherapy from 2010 to 2013 at any 1 of 6 comprehensive cancer centers in British Columbia were included. Chi-square and Wilcoxon-Mann tests were used to assess for associations between treatment groups and clinical characteristics and outcomes. Results: A total of 237 patients were identified; median age was 59 (IQR 53-67) years, 71 (30%) were men, 202 (85%) had ECOG 0/1, and 12 (5%) were HIV positive. Median total radiation dose was 54 cGy (IQR 50.4-54.0) and 21 (9%) underwent a colostomy prior to chemoradiation. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two groups with respect to age, gender, ECOG, and HIV status (all p > 0.05). Overall, 155 patients (65%) received capecitabine. Comparing patients who received capecitabine vs 5-FU, overall (69% vs 74%, p = 0.388) and disease-free survival rates (68% vs 71%, p = 0.637) at 5 years from diagnosis were similar between treatment groups. There were no differences with respect to rates of subsequent colostomy (16% vs 23%, p = 0.185) and abdominoperineal resection (11% vs 12%, p = 0.777). However, patients who received capecitabine were less likely to report adverse effects (51% vs 26%, p < 0.001) than those who underwent 5-FU. The capecitabine group had a lower incidence of stomatitis (6% vs 40%, p < 0.001) whereas the 5-FU cohort reported less frequent hand-foot syndrome (1% vs 8%, p = 0.036). Conclusions: This population-based study demonstrates a preference for capecitabine use in place of 5-FU in the curative management of anal cancer. Survival outcomes are similar between the two treatment groups, but capecitabine may be better tolerated.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2017 Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Poster Session C: Cancers of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus

Track

Cancers of the Colon, Rectum, and Anus

Sub Track

Multidisciplinary Treatment

Citation

J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl 4S; abstract 680)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2017.35.4_suppl.680

Abstract #

680

Poster Bd #

H10

Abstract Disclosures