AIM： To assess the use of capecitabine-based therapy and associated complication rates in patients with gastroesophageal cancer （GEC） in a real-world treat- ment setting. METHODS： Patients with claims between 2004...AIM： To assess the use of capecitabine-based therapy and associated complication rates in patients with gastroesophageal cancer （GEC） in a real-world treat- ment setting. METHODS： Patients with claims between 2004 and 2005 were identified from the Thomson Reuters MarketScan databases. Capecitabine regimens were compared with 5-fluorouracU （5-FU） and other chemotherapy regimens, and were stratified by treatment setting. RESULTS： We identified 1013 patients with GEC： approximately half had treatment initiated with a 5-FU regimen, whereas 11% had therapy initiated with a capecitabine regimen. The mean capecitabine dose overall was 2382 ± 1118 mg/d, and capecitabine was used as monotherapy more often than in combination. Overall, 5-FU regimens were the most common treat- ment option in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, while other non-capecitabine regimens were used more widely in first- and second-line settings. The overall unadjusted complication rate for capecitabine regimens was about half of that seen with 5-FU regimens. In multivariate analyses, capecitabine recipients had a 51% （95% CI： 26%-81%） lower risk of developing any complication than 5-FU recipients did. The risk of developing bone marrow, constitutional, gastrointestinal tract, infectious, or skin complications was lower with capecitabine therapy than with 5-FU.CONCLUSION： Capecitabine appeared to have a favorable side effect profile compared with 5-FU, which indicates that it may be a treatment option for GEC.展开更多
英国的研发总支出(Gross Expenditure on R&D,GERD)占全球份额的4%,其科研人员数量占全球份额的6%,这部分科研人员贡献了8%的全球研究论文。而这些论文拥有11%的全球引文量,并创造了14%的全球高被引论文,在被引频次超过500的全球论...英国的研发总支出(Gross Expenditure on R&D,GERD)占全球份额的4%,其科研人员数量占全球份额的6%,这部分科研人员贡献了8%的全球研究论文。而这些论文拥有11%的全球引文量,并创造了14%的全球高被引论文,在被引频次超过500的全球论文中占有17%的份额,在被引频次超过1000的全球论文中占有20%的份额。目前,英国科研的平均影响力超越了美国。尽管在科研方面成绩比较突出,但是英国的私营企业在科研方面的投资相对较低,且落后于相应的竞争对手。英国的科研创新能力与潜力与其经济实力并不相称,但这并不是其整个国家科研基础的问题。展开更多
1引言 谁是这个时代最优秀的科研精英？为了回答这个问题，汤森路透基于Web of Science和In Cites平台，通过分析过去11年的引文数据（20022012和20122013），遴选出高被引科研人员。这些科研人员发表了多篇被同行频繁引用的高影响力论...1引言 谁是这个时代最优秀的科研精英？为了回答这个问题，汤森路透基于Web of Science和In Cites平台，通过分析过去11年的引文数据（20022012和20122013），遴选出高被引科研人员。这些科研人员发表了多篇被同行频繁引用的高影响力论文，他们正影响着本领域乃至世界的发展方向。展开更多
文摘AIM： To assess the use of capecitabine-based therapy and associated complication rates in patients with gastroesophageal cancer （GEC） in a real-world treat- ment setting. METHODS： Patients with claims between 2004 and 2005 were identified from the Thomson Reuters MarketScan databases. Capecitabine regimens were compared with 5-fluorouracU （5-FU） and other chemotherapy regimens, and were stratified by treatment setting. RESULTS： We identified 1013 patients with GEC： approximately half had treatment initiated with a 5-FU regimen, whereas 11% had therapy initiated with a capecitabine regimen. The mean capecitabine dose overall was 2382 ± 1118 mg/d, and capecitabine was used as monotherapy more often than in combination. Overall, 5-FU regimens were the most common treat- ment option in neoadjuvant and adjuvant settings, while other non-capecitabine regimens were used more widely in first- and second-line settings. The overall unadjusted complication rate for capecitabine regimens was about half of that seen with 5-FU regimens. In multivariate analyses, capecitabine recipients had a 51% （95% CI： 26%-81%） lower risk of developing any complication than 5-FU recipients did. The risk of developing bone marrow, constitutional, gastrointestinal tract, infectious, or skin complications was lower with capecitabine therapy than with 5-FU.CONCLUSION： Capecitabine appeared to have a favorable side effect profile compared with 5-FU, which indicates that it may be a treatment option for GEC.
文摘英国的研发总支出(Gross Expenditure on R&D,GERD)占全球份额的4%,其科研人员数量占全球份额的6%,这部分科研人员贡献了8%的全球研究论文。而这些论文拥有11%的全球引文量,并创造了14%的全球高被引论文,在被引频次超过500的全球论文中占有17%的份额,在被引频次超过1000的全球论文中占有20%的份额。目前,英国科研的平均影响力超越了美国。尽管在科研方面成绩比较突出,但是英国的私营企业在科研方面的投资相对较低,且落后于相应的竞争对手。英国的科研创新能力与潜力与其经济实力并不相称,但这并不是其整个国家科研基础的问题。
文摘1引言 谁是这个时代最优秀的科研精英？为了回答这个问题，汤森路透基于Web of Science和In Cites平台，通过分析过去11年的引文数据（20022012和20122013），遴选出高被引科研人员。这些科研人员发表了多篇被同行频繁引用的高影响力论文，他们正影响着本领域乃至世界的发展方向。
