Copyright
©The Author(s) 2020.
World J Clin Cases. Nov 6, 2020; 8(21): 5172-5179
Published online Nov 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172
Published online Nov 6, 2020. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172
Table 2 Comparison of efficacy between the two groups, n %
| Curative effect | S-1 group (n = 47) | Gemcitabine group (n = 47) | χ2/t | P value |
| Complete remission | 3 (6.38) | 2 (4.26) | 0.446 | 0.504 |
| Remission | 13 (27.66) | 12 (25.53) | 0.116 | 0.733 |
| Controlled | 17 (36.17) | 18 (38.30) | 0.097 | 0.755 |
| Progressed | 14 (29.79) | 15 (31.91) | 0.105 | 0.746 |
| Total effective rate of treatment | 16 (34.04) | 14 (29.79) | 0.416 | 0.519 |
- Citation: Cheng XW, Leng WH, Mu CL. Efficacy and safety of S-1 maintenance therapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer patients. World J Clin Cases 2020; 8(21): 5172-5179
- URL: https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v8/i21/5172.htm
- DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.12998/wjcc.v8.i21.5172