The DOI matches its Crossref record; 20 of the 20 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Gemcitabine-based or capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: In the UK, chemotherapy is the standard treatment for inoperable, locally advanced, non-metastatic pancreatic cancer. Chemoradiotherapy is also an acceptable treatment option, for which gemcitabine, fluorouracil, or capecitabine can be used as concurrent chemotherapy agents. We aimed to assess the activity, safety, and feasibility of both gemcitabine-based and capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy after induction chemotherapy for patients with locally advanced pancreatic cancer. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised, two-arm, phase 2 trial, patients aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, locally advanced pancreatic cancer (with a tumour diameter of 7 cm or less) were recruited from 28 UK centres between Dec 24, 2009 and Oct 25, 2011. After 12 weeks of induction gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy (three cycles of gemcitabine [1000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle] and capecitabine [830 mg/m(2) twice daily on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle]), patients with stable or responding disease, tumour diameter of 6 cm or less, and WHO performance status 0-1 were randomly assigned to receive a further cycle of gemcitabine and capecitabine chemotherapy followed by either gemcitabine (300 mg/m(2) once per week) or capecitabine (830 mg/m(2) twice daily, Monday to Friday only), both in combination with radiation (50·4 Gy in 28 fractions). Randomisation (1:1) was done via a central computerised system and used stratified minimisation. The primary endpoint was 9-month progression-free survival, analysed by intention to treat including only those patients with valid CT assessments. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, number 96169987. FINDINGS: 114 patients were registered and 74 were randomly allocated (38 to the gemcitabine group and 36 to the capecitabine group). After 9 months, 22 of 35 assessable patients (62·9%, 80% CI 50·6-73·9) in the capecitabine group and 18 of 35 assessable patients (51·4%, 39·4-63·4) in the gemcitabine group had not progressed. Median overall survival was 15·2 months (95% CI 13·9-19·2) in the capecitabine group and 13·4 months (95% CI 11·0-15·7) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0·39, 95% CI 0·18-0·81; p=0·012). 12-month overall survival was 79·2% (95% CI 61·1-89·5) in the capecitabine group and 64·2 (95% CI 46·4-77·5) in the gemcitabine group. Median progression-free survival was 12·0 months (95% CI 10·2-14·6) in the capecitabine group and 10·4 months (95% CI 8·9-12·5) in the gemcitabine group (adjusted HR 0·60, 95% CI 0·32-1·12; p=0·11). Eight patients in the capecitabine group had an objective response at 26 weeks, as did seven in the gemcitabine group. More patients in the gemcitabine group than in the capecitabine group had grade 3-4 haematological toxic effects (seven [18%] vs none, p=0·008) and non-haematological toxic effects (ten [26%] vs four [12%], p=0·12) during chemoradiation treatment; the most frequent events were leucopenia, neutropenia, and fatigue. Two patients in the capecitabine group progressed during the fourth cycle of induction chemotherapy. Of the 34 patients in the capecitabine group who received chemoradiotherapy, 25 (74%) received the full protocol dose of radiotherapy, compared with 26 (68%) of 38 patients in the gemcitabine group. Quality-of-life scores were not significantly different between the treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: Our results suggest that a capecitabine-based regimen might be preferable to a gemcitabine-based regimen in the context of consolidation chemoradiotherapy after a course of induction chemotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer. However, these findings should be interpreted with caution because the difference in the primary endpoint was non-significant and the number of patients in the trial was small. 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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Aaronson, N. K., Ahmedzai, S., Bergman, B., Bullinger, M., Cull, A., Duez, N. J., Filiberti, A., Flechtner, H., Fleishman, S. B., Haes, J. C. J. M. D., et al. (1993) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/85.5.365 · Cited by 16,005
Spencer, P. M., Cameron, J. L., & Lin, L. (2000) · Cited by 7,202
Burris, H. A., Moore, M. J., Andersen, J., Green, M. R., Rothenberg, M. L., Modiano, M. R., Cripps, M. C., Portenoy, R. K., Storniolo, A. M., Tarassoff, P., et al. (1997) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1997.15.6.2403 · Cited by 5,894
Hidalgo, M. (2010) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmra0901557 · Cited by 2,570
Louvet, C., Labianca, R., Hammel, P., Lledo, G., Zampino, M. G., André, T., Zaniboni, A., Ducreux, M., Aitini, E., Taïeb, J., et al. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.06.023 · Cited by 950
Loehrer, P. J., Feng, Y., Cardenes, H., Wagner, L., Brell, J. M., Cella, D., Flynn, P., Ramanathan, R. K., Crane, C. H., Alberts, S. R., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2011.34.8904 · Cited by 830
Cunningham, D., Chau, I., Stocken, D. D., Valle, J. W., Smith, D., Steward, W., Harper, P. G., Dunn, J., Tudur-Smith, C., West, J., et al. (2009) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.24.2446 · Cited by 823
Self-citationChauffert, B., Mornex, F., Bonnetain, F., Rougier, P., Mariette, C., Bouché, O., Bosset, J. F., Aparicio, T., Mineur, L., Azzedine, A., et al. (2008) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdn281 · Cited by 696
Gastrointestinal Tumor Study Group (1988) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/80.10.751 · Cited by 578
Huguet, F., André, T., Hammel, P., Artru, P., Balosso, J., Selle, F., Deniaud-Alexandre, E., Ruszniewski, P., Touboul, E., Labianca, R., et al. (2007) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2006.07.5663 · Cited by 529
Cited by
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma, Version 2.2017, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Tempero, M. A., Malafa, M. P., Al-Hawary, M., Asbun, H., Bain, A., Behrman, S. W., Benson, A. B., Binder, E., Cardin, D. B., Cha, C., et al. (2017) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2017.0131 · Cited by 1,020
Neoadjuvant therapy for pancreatic cancer
Springfeld, C., Ferrone, C. R., Katz, M. H. G., Philip, P. A., Hong, T. S., Hackert, T., Büchler, M. W., & Neoptolemos, J. (2023) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-023-00746-1 · Cited by 377
Activation of protein phosphatase 2A tumor suppressor as potential treatment of pancreatic cancer
Chien, W., Sun, Q.-Y., Lee, K. L., Ding, L.-W., Wuensche, P., Torres-Fernandez, L. A., Tan, S. Z., Tokatly, I., Zaiden, N., Poellinger, L., et al. (2015) · Molecular Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2015.01.002 · Cited by 80
Metadata
- Authors
- Mukherjee, S., Hurt, C. N., Bridgewater, J., Falk, S., Cummins, S., Wasan, H., Crosby, T., Jephcott, C., Roy, R., Radhakrishna, G., McDonald, A., Ray, R., Joseph, G., Staffurth, J., Abrams, R. A., Griffiths, G., & Maughan, T.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 317-326
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2130409622
- Cited by
- 355
- References
- 20
- FWCI
- 17.55
- 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: Gemcitabine-based or capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70021-4
- The paper
- Mukherjee, S., Hurt, C. N., Bridgewater, J., Falk, S., Cummins, S., Wasan, H., Crosby, T., Jephcott, C., Roy, R., Radhakrishna, G., McDonald, A., Ray, R., Joseph, G., Staffurth, J., Abrams, R. A., Griffiths, G., & Maughan, T. (2013). Gemcitabine-based or capecitabine-based chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced pancreatic cancer (SCALOP): a multicentre, randomised, phase 2 trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(13)70021-4
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.