↓ Skip to main content

Factors Impacting Treatment Choice in the First-Line Treatment of Colorectal Cancer

Overview of attention for article published in Oncology and Therapy, May 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
28 Mendeley
Title
Factors Impacting Treatment Choice in the First-Line Treatment of Colorectal Cancer
Published in
Oncology and Therapy, May 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40487-016-0020-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Lourens T. Bloem, Richard De Abreu Lourenço, Melvin Chin, Brett Ly, Marion Haas

Abstract

To investigate the factors that affect the choice of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or its oral alternative, capecitabine, as first-line treatment in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC). Patients treated with 5-FU or capecitabine for CRC between January 1, 2011 and December 31, 2013 in a teaching hospital in the Sydney metropolitan area, Australia were identified using the hospital's database MOSAIQ(®). The electronic medical record of each patient was manually reviewed to extract factors potentially affecting treatment choice. Logistic regression was used to assess which patient and/or treatment factors could explain the choice between 5-FU or capecitabine. Where it was available in the medical correspondence, the explicit reason for the choice made was extracted. 170 CRC patients were included; 119 on 5-FU, and 51 on capecitabine. The odds of receiving capecitabine as a first-line treatment were positively associated with giving patients a choice in the decision (OR = 17.51, 95% CI: 5.37-57.08). Qualitative data suggest treatment choices were motivated by convenience (oral administration) and tolerability. Time from diagnosis to treatment commencement (OR = 1.02 per month, 95% CI 1.00-1.04) was also found to be positively associated with the choice of capecitabine. The odds of being treated with capecitabine were lower for patients who lived further from the treating hospital (OR = 0.22, 95% CI 0.05-0.94). This study suggests that patient choice, favoring oral capecitabine over i.v. 5-FU, was a key factor influencing first-line treatment for CRC in this cohort. To respect their autonomy, patients should be involved in the clinical decision making process.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 28 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 28 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 4 14%
Student > Master 4 14%
Lecturer 2 7%
Librarian 1 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 4%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 12 43%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 18%
Medicine and Dentistry 4 14%
Engineering 2 7%
Unspecified 1 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 4%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 12 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2016.
All research outputs
#19,516,978
of 23,999,200 outputs
Outputs from Oncology and Therapy
#8
of 11 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#233,983
of 313,502 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Oncology and Therapy
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,999,200 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 11 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one scored the same or higher as 3 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 313,502 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them