Talk:Capecitabine

Pharmacology Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pharmacology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pharmacology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PharmacologyWikipedia:WikiProject PharmacologyTemplate:WikiProject Pharmacologypharmacology articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Medicine C‑class Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine articles
C	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemicals Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemicals, a daughter project of WikiProject Chemistry, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of chemicals. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.ChemicalsWikipedia:WikiProject ChemicalsTemplate:WikiProject Chemicalschemicals articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ideal sources for Wikipedia's health content are defined in the guideline Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine) and are typically review articles. Here are links to possibly useful sources of information about Capecitabine.

PubMed provides review articles from the past five years (limit to free review articles)
The TRIP database provides clinical publications about evidence-based medicine.
Other potential sources include: Centre for Reviews and Dissemination and CDC

structure is wrong

The structure in this article is wrong - the N4 side group should be a pentyloxycarbamate, i.e. R-NH(C=O)O-(CH2)4CH3.

See http://cancerquest.org/index.cfm?page=1179

22:14, 7 July 2006‎ Scoutts6151

May erase your fingerprints!

Interesting story on the BBC News website: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8064332.stm.

"A commonly-used cancer drug can make patients' fingerprints disappear, potentially causing problems for foreign travel, a doctor warns."

A man was taking capecitabine, which was causing hand-foot syndrome and led to the loss of his fingerprints. Unable to scan his fingerprints and check them against their database(s), US border officials detained him for four hours until they could verify his identity by other means.

Also covered by many medical websites, e.g. http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/Chemotherapy/14391.

Original paper in Annals of Oncology: M. Wong, S.-P. Choo, E.-H. Tan, "Travel warning with capecitabine", Ann. Oncol (2009) 21, ???-???.

Ben (talk) 16:47, 27 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I can anecdotally confirm this. I am taking capecitabine 2000mg twice a day, and have got slightly swollen fingertips. But it's enough to remove fingerprints in the central part of where they are usually taken. The skin there is very shiny, it is obvious that the prints are gone. Area-wise, perhaps half of the fingerprints are gone. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.146.158.34 (talk) 10:15, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Dosage? - calculated according to body surface area

The article gives 'The usual starting dose is 2,500 mg/m2/day' surely that middle term can't mean square metres? I don't understand that. Anyone help? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.143.55.145 (talk) 21:15, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I THINK it's supposed to mean 2500mg twice a day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 110.146.158.34 (talk) 10:10, 10 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It does mean metres squared. p4 of the Xoloda prescribing info says "XELODA dose is calculated according to body surface area." Table 1 shows daily doses for surface areas from <1.25 m² to >2.18 m². - Rod57 (talk) 15:33, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
body surface area shows 9 different formulae for calculating BSA from height and weight. - Rod57 (talk) 20:49, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also useful for pancreatic cancer

A recent trial shows Gemzar-Xeloda Tx: The New Standard in Pancreatic Ca? it can usefully be added to gemcitabine to manage [some] pancreatic cancer. - Rod57 (talk) 15:39, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

My attempt to mention this - with a secondary source was reverted with not MEDRS. This news has been widely reported and discussed so I'm surprised anyone thinks the article is better without it. - Rod57 (talk) 21:39, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

this was the edit. the sources were this commenter and a conference abstract. This drug, like many others, may fail in subsequent trials or never get regulatory approval or may fail for business reasons and never matter. We are WP:NOTNEWS. That is policy. There are lots of websites people can follow to get news on drugs in development. We can wait for MEDRS sources - there is WP:NODEADLINE here (because we are not a newspaper) Jytdog (talk) 22:07, 15 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Still expensive even with four generics on the market

According to Forbes : Generic Chemo Is Too Expensive To Help Curb Cancer Spending, Study Says - Could mention the generics ? - Rod57 (talk) 10:20, 6 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]