Both regimens were well tolerated and did not differ in their impact on HRQoL. Moreover, two recent studies underlined the preference Imatinib Mesylate side effects of patients for capecitabine over 5-FU. Pelusi (2006) confirmed that the oral approach was preferred by patients because of its convenience (fewer medical office visits, no intravenous access required) and by clinicians because it eliminated the risk of complications, such as infection and clotting associated with venous access devices and infusion pumps. In another study conducted by Twelves et al (2006), 97 patients with previously untreated advanced or mCRC were randomised to receive capecitabine, followed by intravenous 5-FU/LV (Mayo Clinic, in-patient de Gramont or outpatient modified de Gramont regimens), or intravenous 5-FU/LV followed by capecitabine.

Quality of life was assessed with the FACT-C questionnaire. The results confirmed that the majority of patients with mCRC preferred oral therapy. Health economic results based on the current clinical trial further showed that XELOX significantly decreased the direct treatment costs of mCRC patients, as well as hospital resource consumption, in comparison with FOLFOX-6 (Perrocheau et al, 2009). Considering clinical and economic impacts, the XELOX regimen seems to be a relevant alternative to FOLFOX-6 in the first-line treatment of mCRC. Conclusion This study was the first clinical trial to evaluate QoL and health-care satisfaction in patients receiving XELOX in the first-line treatment of mCRC.

XELOX has a similar QoL profile, but seems to be more convenient in terms of administration at certain time points and reduced time lost for work or other activities compared with FOLFOX-6. Therefore, capecitabine, used in the XELOX regimen, clearly represents an effective and well-tolerated oral alternative to intravenous 5-FU/LV. Acknowledgments Financial Dacomitinib support for this research was provided by Roche. We thank st[��]ve consultants for writing the paper and for performing additional statistical analyses (test of internal validity of both questionnaires and completion rate/missing data analysis).