Skip to content
2000
image of Adverse Drug Reaction Profile of Capecitabine-based Chemotherapy Regimen and its Predisposing Factors in Patients Attending a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India

Abstract

Introduction

Capecitabine is known to be associated with many Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs). Due to a lack of prospective studies, we aimed to determine the frequency and pattern of the ADR profile associated with the Capecitabine-based Chemotherapy Regimen (CBCR).

Methods

A prospective observational study was carried out at a tertiary care hospital in South India. ADRs in patients on CBCR were evaluated throughout the complete course of chemotherapy. They were graded for severity as per CTCAE criteria (v4.03) and assessed for causality and preventability. The Chi-squared test was used to analyze differences in the frequency of ADRs among cancer types, gender, and chemotherapy regimens.

Results

Most ADRs (96.6%) reported were related to the gastrointestinal system, followed by neurological events (93.3%) among 120 cancer patients on CBCR. Among the detected ADRs, skin/nail discoloration and fatigue/weakness were the most frequently reported. The majority of ADRs were classified as “possible” (50.5% by WHO and 50.9% by the Naranjo scale). Most ADRs were of grade I severity (54.5%) and were deemed “probably preventable.”

Discussion

The observed frequency of ADRs was similar to a few reported studies, but differed on the basis of the type of ADR. There is a lack of literature on the causality and preventability of ADRs with CBCR.

Conclusion

CBCR was associated with several ADRs, although most were of grade I severity and involved the gastrointestinal system. The majority of ADRs were classified as “possible” based on causality analysis, and most were deemed “probably preventable.” Future research should focus on mitigating these ADRs to avoid dose adjustments or discontinuation of chemotherapy.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/cds/10.2174/0115748863366875250526114841
2025-06-12
2025-09-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Chabner B.A. Roberts T.G. Chemotherapy and the war on cancer. Nat. Rev. Cancer 2005 5 1 65 72 10.1038/nrc1529 15630416
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Anand U. Dey A. Chandel A.K.S. Sanyal R. Mishra A. Pandey D.K. De Falco V. Upadhyay A. Kandimalla R. Chaudhary A. Dhanjal J.K. Dewanjee S. Vallamkondu J. Pérez de la Lastra J.M. Cancer chemotherapy and beyond: Current status, drug candidates, associated risks and progress in targeted therapeutics. Genes Dis. 2023 10 4 1367 1401 10.1016/j.gendis.2022.02.007 37397557
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Michaeli D.T. Michaeli J.C. Michaeli T. Advances in cancer therapy: Clinical benefit of new cancer drugs. Aging 2023 15 12 5232 5234 10.18632/aging.204839 37338507
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Wahlang J.B. Laishram P.D. Brahma D.K. Sarkar C. Lahon J. Nongkynrih B.S. Adverse drug reactions due to cancer chemotherapy in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Ther. Adv. Drug Saf. 2017 8 2 61 66 10.1177/2042098616672572 28255433
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Tuccori M. Montagnani S. Capogrosso-Sansone A. Mantarro S. Antonioli L. Fornai M. Blandizzi C. Adverse reactions to oncologic drugs: Spontaneous reporting and signal detection. Expert Rev. Clin. Pharmacol. 2015 8 1 61 75 10.1586/17512433.2015.974555 25363790
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Strumia A. Perrin M. de Campaigno E.P. Conte C. Montastruc F. Lapeyre-Mestre M. Dermatological adverse drug reactions of anticancer drugs: International data of pharmacovigilance: VigiBase®. Therapies 2022 77 2 219 227 10.1016/j.therap.2021.12.006
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Vaseghi G. Abed A. Jafari E. Eslami N. Eshraghi A. Assessment of adverse drug reaction due to cancer chemotherapy in a teaching oncology hospital in Isfahan, Central of Iran. Rev. Recent Clin. Trials 2016 11 3 266 272 10.2174/1574887110666150818112648 26282897
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Sharma P.K. Misra A.K. Gupta A. Singh S. A retrospective analysis of reporting of adverse drug reactions to oncology drugs: An experience from a national center of clinical excellence. Indian J. Pharmacol. 2018 50 5 273 278 10.4103/ijp.IJP_544_17
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Baldo P. Fornasier G. Ciolfi L. Sartor I. Francescon S. Pharmacovigilance in oncology. Int. J. Clin. Pharm. 2018 40 4 832 841 10.1007/s11096‑018‑0706‑9 30069667
    [Google Scholar]
  10. The importance of pharmacovigilance. Available from: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/10665-42493[Last accessed on 18th Oct 2024]
  11. Koukourakis G.V. Kouloulias V. Koukourakis M.J. Zacharias G.A. Zabatis H. Kouvaris J. Efficacy of the oral fluorouracil pro-drug capecitabine in cancer treatment: A review. Molecules 2008 13 8 1897 1922 10.3390/molecules13081897 18794792
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Alzahrani S. Al Doghaither H. Al-ghafari A. Pushparaj P. 5‑Fluorouracil and capecitabine therapies for the treatment of colorectal cancer (Review). Oncol. Rep. 2023 50 4 175 10.3892/or.2023.8612 37594133
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Gradishar W.J. Meza L.A. Amin B. Samid D. Hill T. Chen Y.M. Lower E.E. Marcom P.K. Capecitabine plus paclitaxel as front-line combination therapy for metastatic breast cancer: A multicenter phase II study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2004 22 12 2321 2327 10.1200/JCO.2004.12.128 15197193
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Wist EA Sommer HH Ostenstad B Risberg T Bremnes Y Mjaaland I Oral capecitabine in anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated advanced/metastatic breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 2004 43 2 186 189 10.1080/02841860310023165
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Twelves C. Gollins S. Grieve R. Samuel L. A randomised cross-over trial comparing patient preference for oral capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin regimens in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. Ann. Oncol. 2006 17 2 239 245 10.1093/annonc/mdj023 16344278
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Cassidy J. Douillard J-Y. Twelves C. McKendrick J.J. Scheithauer W. Bustová I. Johnston P.G. Lesniewski-Kmak K. Jelic S. Fountzilas G. Coxon F. Díaz-Rubio E. Maughan T.S. Malzyner A. Bertetto O. Beham A. Figer A. Dufour P. Patel K.K. Cowell W. Garrison L.P. Pharmacoeconomic analysis of adjuvant oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-FU/LV in Dukes’ C colon cancer: The X-ACT trial. Br. J. Cancer 2006 94 8 1122 1129 10.1038/sj.bjc.6603059 16622438
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Wu Z. Zhang X. Zhang C. Lin Y. Meta‐analysis of capecitabine versus 5‐fluorouracil in advanced gastric cancer. Evid. Based Complement. Alternat. Med. 2023 2023 1 4946642 10.1155/2023/4946642 37408581
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Cunningham D. Starling N. Rao S. Iveson T. Nicolson M. Coxon F. Middleton G. Daniel F. Oates J. Norman A.R. Upper Gastrointestinal Clinical Studies Group of the National Cancer Research Institute of the United Kingdom Capecitabine and oxaliplatin for advanced esophagogastric cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 2008 358 1 36 46 10.1056/NEJMoa073149 18172173
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Hoff P.M. Ansari R. Batist G. Cox J. Kocha W. Kuperminc M. Maroun J. Walde D. Weaver C. Harrison E. Burger H.U. Osterwalder B. Wong A.O. Wong R. Comparison of oral capecitabine versus intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment in 605 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a randomized phase III study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2001 19 8 2282 2292 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.8.2282 11304782
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Van Cutsem E. Twelves C. Cassidy J. Allman D. Bajetta E. Boyer M. Bugat R. Findlay M. Frings S. Jahn M. et al. Oral capecitabine compared with intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: Results of a large phase III study. J. Clin. Oncol. 2001 19 4097 4106 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.21.4097
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Cutsem E. Hoff P. Harper P. et al. [Last accessed on 2025 Feb 12] Oral capecitabine vs intravenous 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin: integrated efficacy data and novel analyses from two large, randomised, phase III trials. Br. J. Cancer 2004 90 1190 1197 10.1038/sj.bjc.6601676
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Cassidy J. Twelves C. Van Cutsem E. Hoff P. Bajetta E. Boyer M. Bugat R. Burger U. Garin A. Graeven U. et al. First-line oral capecitabine therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: A favorable safety profile compared with intravenous 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin. Ann. Oncol. 2002 13 566 575 10.1093/annonc/mdf089
    [Google Scholar]
  23. The use of the WHO-UMC system for standardised case causality assessment. Available from: https://www.who.int/docs/default-source/medicines/pharmacovigilance/whocausality-assessment.pdf[Last accessed on 2025 Feb 12]
  24. Naranjo C.A. Busto U. Sellers E.M. Sandor P. Ruiz I. Roberts E.A. Janecek E. Domecq C. Greenblatt D.J. A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 1981 30 2 239 245 10.1038/clpt.1981.154 7249508
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Mehrpooya M. Vaseghi G. Eshraghi A. Eslami N. Delayed myocardial infarction associated with rituximab infusion. Am. J. Ther. 2016 23 1 e283 e287 10.1097/MJT.0000000000000214 26196524
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Sharma A. Kumari K. M. Manohar H. D. Bairy K. L. Thomas J. Pattern of adverse drug reactions due to cancer chemotherapy in a tertiary care hospital in South India. Perspect. Clin. Res. 2015 6 2 109 115 10.4103/2229‑3485.154014
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) version 4. Available from: https://evs.nci.nih.gov/ftp1/CTCAE/CTCAE _4.03/ CTCAE_4.03_2010-06-14_QuickReference_8.5x11.pdf[Last accessed on 2025 Feb 13].
  28. Manjhi P.K. Singh M.P. Kumar M. Causality, severity, preventability and predictability assessments scales for adverse drug reactions: A review. Cureus 2024 16 5 e59975 10.7759/cureus.59975 38854273
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Baan J. Capecitabine-induced toxicity: An outcome study into drug safety. J. Interv. Oncol. 2014 3 1 1 10.4172/2329‑6771.1000113
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Wang X. Jin J. Li YX. Ren H. Fang H. Wang SL. et al. Phase I study of postoperative radiotherapy combined with capecitabine for gastric cancer. World J. Gastroenterol. 2014 20 1067 1073
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Bullock A. Stuart K. Jacobus S. Abrams T. Wadlow R. Goldstein M. et al. Capecitabine and oxaliplatin as first and second line treatment for locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. J. Gastrointest. Oncol. 2017 8 945 952
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Ye J.X. Liu A.Q. Ge L.Y. Zhou S.Z. Liang Z.G. Effectiveness and safety profile of S-1-based chemotherapy compared with capecitabine-based chemotherapy for advanced gastric and colorectal cancer: A meta-analysis. Exp. Ther. Med. 2014 7 5 1271 1278 10.3892/etm.2014.1576 24940424
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Heidari S. Babor T.F. De Castro P. Sex and gender equity in research: Rationale for the SAGER guidelines and recommended use. Res Integr Peer Rev. 2016 1 2 10.1186/s41073‑016‑0007‑6
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Wáng Y.X.J. Wáng J.Q. Káplár Z. Increased low back pain prevalence in females than in males after menopause age: evidences based on synthetic literature review. Quant. Imaging Med. Surg. 2016 6 2 199 206 10.21037/qims.2016.04.06 27190772
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Azuma Y. Hata K. Sai K. Udagawa R. Hirakawa A. Tohkin M. Ryushima Y. Makino Y. Yokote N. Morikawa N. Fujiwara Y. Saito Y. Yamamoto H. Significant association between hand-foot syndrome and efficacy of capecitabine in patients with metastatic breast cancer. Biol. Pharm. Bull. 2012 35 5 717 724 10.1248/bpb.35.717 22687407
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Heo Y.S. Chang H.M. Kim T.W. Ryu M.H. Ahn J.H. Kim S.B. Lee J.S. Kim W.K. Cho H.K. Kang Y.K. Hand-foot syndrome in patients treated with capecitabine-containing combination chemotherapy. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 2004 44 10 1166 1172 10.1177/0091270004268321 15342618
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Stintzing S. Fischer von Weikersthal L. Vehling-Kaiser U. Stauch M. Hass H.G. Dietzfelbinger H. Oruzio D. Klein S. Zellmann K. Decker T. Schulze M. Abenhardt W. Puchtler G. Kappauf H. Mittermüller J. Haberl C. Giessen C. Moosmann N. Heinemann V. Correlation of capecitabine-induced skin toxicity with treatment efficacy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results from the German AIO KRK-0104 trial. Br. J. Cancer 2011 105 2 206 211 10.1038/bjc.2011.227 21750558
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Chen M. Chen J. Peng X. Xu Z. Shao J. Zhu Y. Li G. Zhu H. Yang B. Luo P. He Q. The contribution of keratinocytes in capecitabine-stimulated hand-foot-syndrome. Environ. Toxicol. Pharmacol. 2017 49 81 88 10.1016/j.etap.2016.12.001 27951409
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Inokuchi M. Ishikawa S. Furukawa H. Takamura H. Ninomiya I. Kitagawa H. Fushida S. Fujimura T. Ohta T. Treatment of capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome using a topical retinoid: A case report. Oncol. Lett. 2014 7 2 444 448 10.3892/ol.2013.1706 24396465
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Abotchie P.N. Vernon S.W. Du X.L. Gender differences in colorectal cancer incidence in the United States, 1975-2006. J. Womens Health 2012 21 4 393 400 10.1089/jwh.2011.2992 22149014
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Karimi P. Islami F. Anandasabapathy S. Freedman N.D. Kamangar F. Gastric cancer: Descriptive epidemiology, risk factors, screening, and prevention. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev. 2014 23 5 700 713 10.1158/1055‑9965.EPI‑13‑1057 24618998
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Fock K.M. Review article: The epidemiology and prevention of gastric cancer. Aliment. Pharmacol. Ther. 2014 40 3 250 260 10.1111/apt.12814 24912650
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Swathi B. Bhavika D. Begum N. Adverse drug reaction profi les of commonly used platinum compounds in cancer chemotherapy. Int. J. Basic Clin. Pharmacol. 2015 4 284 289
    [Google Scholar]
/content/journals/cds/10.2174/0115748863366875250526114841
Loading
/content/journals/cds/10.2174/0115748863366875250526114841
Loading

Data & Media loading...


  • Article Type:
    Research Article
Keywords: Capecitabine ; adverse drug reactions ; chemotherapy ; causality analysis ; naranjo ; preventability
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error
Please enter a valid_number test