Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 264

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial

Open access
Adams, Richard A, Meade, Angela M, Seymour, Matthew T, Wilson, Richard H, Madi, Ayman, Fisher, David, Kenny, Sarah L, Kay, Edward, Hodgkinson, Elizabeth, Pope, Malcolm, Rogers, Penny, Wasan, Harpreet, Falk, Stephen, Gollins, Simon, Hickish, Tamas, Bessell, Eric M, Propper, David, Kennedy, M John, Kaplan, Richard, Maughan, Timothy S·2011·The Lancet Oncology

Abstract

BACKGROUND: When cure is impossible, cancer treatment should focus on both length and quality of life. Maximisation of time without toxic effects could be one effective strategy to achieve both of these goals. The COIN trial assessed preplanned treatment holidays in advanced colorectal cancer to achieve this aim. METHODS: COIN was a randomised controlled trial in patients with previously untreated advanced colorectal cancer. Patients received either continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination (arm A), continuous chemotherapy plus cetuximab (arm B), or intermittent (arm C) chemotherapy. In arms A and B, treatment continued until development of progressive disease, cumulative toxic effects, or the patient chose to stop. In arm C, patients who had not progressed at their 12-week scan started a chemotherapy-free interval until evidence of disease progression, when the same treatment was restarted. Randomisation was done centrally (via telephone) by the MRC Clinical Trials Unit using minimisation. Treatment allocation was not masked. The comparison of arms A and B is described in a companion paper. Here, we compare arms A and C, with the primary objective of establishing whether overall survival on intermittent therapy was non-inferior to that on continuous therapy, with a predefined non-inferiority boundary of 1.162. Intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol analyses were done. This trial is registered, ISRCTN27286448. FINDINGS: 1630 patients were randomly assigned to treatment groups (815 to continuous and 815 to intermittent therapy). Median survival in the ITT population (n=815 in both groups) was 15.8 months (IQR 9.4-26.1) in arm A and 14.4 months (8.0-24.7) in arm C (hazard ratio [HR] 1.084, 80% CI 1.008-1.165). In the per-protocol population (arm A, n=467; arm C, n=511), median survival was 19.6 months (13.0-28.1) in arm A and 18.0 months (12.1-29.3) in arm C (HR 1.087, 0.986-1.198). The upper limits of CIs for HRs in both analyses were greater than the predefined non-inferiority boundary. Preplanned subgroup analyses in the per-protocol population showed that a raised baseline platelet count, defined as 400,000 per μL or higher (271 [28%] of 978 patients), was associated with poor survival with intermittent chemotherapy: the HR for comparison of arm C and arm A in patients with a normal platelet count was 0.96 (95% CI 0.80-1.15, p=0.66), versus 1.54 (1.17-2.03, p=0.0018) in patients with a raised platelet count (p=0.0027 for interaction). In the per-protocol population, more patients on continuous than on intermittent treatment had grade 3 or worse haematological toxic effects (72 [15%] vs 60 [12%]), whereas nausea and vomiting were more common on intermittent treatment (11 [2%] vs 43 [8%]). Grade 3 or worse peripheral neuropathy (126 [27%] vs 25 [5%]) and hand-foot syndrome (21 [4%] vs 15 [3%]) were more frequent on continuous than on intermittent treatment. INTERPRETATION: Although this trial did not show non-inferiority of intermittent compared with continuous chemotherapy for advanced colorectal cancer in terms of overall survival, chemotherapy-free intervals remain a treatment option for some patients with advanced colorectal cancer, offering reduced time on chemotherapy, reduced cumulative toxic effects, and improved quality of life. Subgroup analyses suggest that patients with normal baseline platelet counts could gain the benefits of intermittent chemotherapy without detriment in survival, whereas those with raised baseline platelet counts have impaired survival and quality of life with intermittent chemotherapy and should not receive a treatment break. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK.

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/s1470-2045(11)70102-4

Cites

19 of 19 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 19 references

Cited by

See all 264

Metadata

Authors
Adams, R. A., Meade, A. M., Seymour, M. T., Wilson, R. H., Madi, A., Fisher, D., Kenny, S. L., Kay, E., Hodgkinson, E., Pope, M., Rogers, P., Wasan, H., Falk, S., Gollins, S., Hickish, T., Bessell, E. M., Propper, D., Kennedy, M. J., Kaplan, R., & Maughan, T. S.
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2011-07
Volume
12
Issue
7
Pages
642-653
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2124451268
Cited by
264
References
19
FWCI
12.68
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
hybrid

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: Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70102-4
The paper
Adams, R. A., Meade, A. M., Seymour, M. T., Wilson, R. H., Madi, A., Fisher, D., Kenny, S. L., Kay, E., Hodgkinson, E., Pope, M., Rogers, P., Wasan, H., Falk, S., Gollins, S., Hickish, T., Bessell, E. M., Propper, D., Kennedy, M. J., Kaplan, R., & Maughan, T. S. (2011). Intermittent versus continuous oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine combination chemotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced colorectal cancer: results of the randomised phase 3 MRC COIN trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70102-4

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.