Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 561

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 3 comparison of dose intensification with 14-day versus 21-day cycles

Open access
Cunningham, David, Hawkes, Eliza A, Jack, Andrew, Qian, Wendi, Smith, Paul, Mouncey, Paul, Pocock, Christopher, Ardeshna, Kirit M, Radford, John A, McMillan, Andrew, Davies, John, Turner, Deborah, Kruger, Anton, Johnson, Peter, Gambell, Joanna, Linch, David·2013·The Lancet

Abstract

BACKGROUND Dose intensification with a combination of cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP) every 2 weeks improves outcomes in patients older than 60 years with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma compared with CHOP every 3 weeks. We investigated whether this survival benefit from dose intensification persists in the presence of rituximab (R-CHOP) in all age groups. METHODS Patients (aged ≥18 years) with previously untreated bulky stage IA to stage IV diffuse large B-cell lymphoma in 119 centres in the UK were randomly assigned centrally in a one-to-one ratio, using minimisation, to receive six cycles of R-CHOP every 14 days plus two cycles of rituximab (R-CHOP-14) or eight cycles of R-CHOP every 21 days (R-CHOP-21). R-CHOP-21 was intravenous cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m(2), doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), vincristine 1·4 mg/m(2) (maximum dose 2 mg), and rituximab 375 mg/m(2) on day 1, and oral prednisolone 40 mg/m(2) on days 1-5, administered every 21 days for a total of eight cycles. R-CHOP-14 was intravenous cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m(2), doxorubicin 50 mg/m(2), vincristine 2 mg, rituximab 375 mg/m(2) on day 1, and oral prednisolone 100 mg on days 1-5, administered every 14 days for six cycles, followed by two further infusions of rituximab 375 mg/m(2) on day 1 every 14 days. The trial was not masked. The primary outcome was overall survival (OS). This study is registered, number ISRCTN 16017947. FINDINGS 1080 patients were assigned to R-CHOP-21 (n=540) and R-CHOP-14 (n=540). With a median follow-up of 46 months (IQR 35-57), 2-year OS was 82·7% (79·5-85·9) in the R-CHOP-14 group and 80·8% (77·5-84·2) in the R-CHOP-21 (standard) group (hazard ratio 0·90, 95% CI 0·70-1·15; p=0·3763). No significant improvement was noted in 2-year progression-free survival (R-CHOP-14 75·4%, 71·8-79·1, and R-CHOP-21 74·8%, 71·0-78·4; 0·94, 0·76-1·17; p=0·5907). High international prognostic index, poor-prognosis molecular characteristics, and cell of origin were not predictive for benefit from either schedule. Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia was higher in the R-CHOP-21 group (318 [60%] of 534 vs 167 [31%] of 534), with no prophylactic use of recombinant human granulocyte-colony stimulating factor mandated in this group, whereas grade 3 or 4 thrombocytopenia was higher with R-CHOP-14 (50 [9%] vs 28 [5%]); other frequent grade 3 or 4 adverse events were febrile neutropenia (58 [11%] vs 28 [5%]) and infection (125 [23%] vs 96 [18%]). Frequencies of non-haematological adverse events were similar in the R-CHOP-21 and R-CHOP-14 groups. INTERPRETATION R-CHOP-14 is not superior to R-CHOP-21 chemotherapy for previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma; therefore, R-CHOP-21 remains the standard first-line treatment in patients with this haematological malignancy. No molecular or clinical subgroup benefited from dose intensification in this study. FUNDING Chugai Pharmaceutical, Cancer Research UK, National Institute for Health Research Biomedical Research Centres scheme at both University College London and the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, and Institute of Cancer Research.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60313-x

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 24 references

Cited by

See all 561

Metadata

Authors
Cunningham, D., Hawkes, E. A., Jack, A., Qian, W., Smith, P., Mouncey, P., Pocock, C., Ardeshna, K. M., Radford, J. A., McMillan, A., Davies, J., Turner, D., Kruger, A., Johnson, P., Gambell, J., & Linch, D.
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-05
Volume
381
Issue
9880
Pages
1817-1826
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2171356556
Cited by
561
References
24
FWCI
34.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 3 comparison of dose intensification with 14-day versus 21-day cycles. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60313-x
The paper
Cunningham, D., Hawkes, E. A., Jack, A., Qian, W., Smith, P., Mouncey, P., Pocock, C., Ardeshna, K. M., Radford, J. A., McMillan, A., Davies, J., Turner, D., Kruger, A., Johnson, P., Gambell, J., & Linch, D. (2013). Rituximab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone in patients with newly diagnosed diffuse large B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma: a phase 3 comparison of dose intensification with 14-day versus 21-day cycles. The Lancet. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(13)60313-x

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.