Efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Previous reports have demonstrated that S-1 has remarkable effects in the maintenance treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and has less toxic and side effects than conventional drugs.

AIM

To investigate the efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance therapy in patients with advanced NSCLC.

METHODS

Ninety-four patients with NSCLC admitted to our hospital from September 2015 to April 2018 were included in the study and divided into the S-1 group (47 cases) and the gemcitabine group (47 cases) by random digital table method. The S-1 group was treated with S-1, while the gemcitabine group received gemcitabine treatment. The clinical efficacy and quality of life of the patients after treatment in the two groups were evaluated.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the total effectiveness rate between the two groups (P = 0.519). The quality-of-life scores indicated that there was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of four dimensions of the GQOLI-74 questionnaire (P = 0.518, 0.094, 0.338, 0.418). The incidence of nausea and vomiting, granulocytopenia and diarrhea in the S-1  group was significantly lower than that in the gemcitabine group (P = 0.001, 0.001 and 0.001, respectively). There was no significant difference in the incidence of thrombocytopenia (P = 0.366), the progression-free survival (P = 0.064), and the survival between the two groups (P = 0.050).

CONCLUSION

S-1 maintenance therapy shows a significant therapeutic effect in patients with advanced NSCLC. It has the same clinical efficacy as gemcitabine, but with less toxic and side effects than conventional drugs.

[Impact of antihypertensive medication timing on degree and stability of blood pressure lowering in patients with essential hypertension]

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the impact of antihypertensive medication timing on degree and stability of blood pressure (BP) lowering in patients with moderate and severe essential hypertension.

METHODS

Ninety patients were randomly assigned to take Valsartan and Felodiping together in the morning (group A), Valsartan in the morning and Felodiping in the evening (group B) or Felodiping in the morning and Valsartan in the evening (group C, n = 30 each). The morning dosage was titrated if the goal blood pressure was not achieved. Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) was performed on the first and 14(th) day of medication.

RESULTS

The BP reductions during nighttime and twenty-four in group B and C hours were similar (P > 0.05) but were significant more than those in group A (P < 0.05). The smoothness indexes of mean systolic, mean arterial blood pressure during nighttime and twenty-four in group B and C were similar but significantly higher than that in group A (P < 0.05). The smoothness index of diastolic pressure at nighttime in group B and C was similar but significantly higher than that in group A (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

More significant and stable antihypertensive effects could be achieved by taking the two antihypertensive medications separately in the morning and at evening compared that taken the two drugs together in the morning.