Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 721

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials

Open access
Hills, Robert K, Castaigne, Sylvie, Appelbaum, Frederick R, Delaunay, Jacques, Petersdorf, Stephen, Othus, Megan, Estey, Elihu H, Dombret, Hervé, Chevret, Sylvie, Ifrah, Norbert, Cahn, Jean-Yves, Récher, Christian, Chilton, Lucy, Moorman, Anthony V, Burnett, Alan K·2014·The Lancet Oncology
DOI 10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70281-5
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Summary Background Gemtuzumab Ozogamicin (GO) was the first example of antibody directed chemotherapy in cancer and developed for Acute Myeloid Leukaemia. Its role has been unclear. Five randomised trials where it was combined with standard induction chemotherapy in adults have produced different results. In an effort to clarify the level of benefit, if any, and in which patients outcomes might be improved, an individual patient data meta-analysis of these 5 trials has been undertaken. Methods All randomised trials of GO in adults (age >15), given in conjunction with the first course of intensive induction chemotherapy for AML (excluding APL) were identified. In a collaboration between the groups involved, source data concerning demographics, treatment was requested in May 2013 and collected in 3325 randomised patients (median age 58). All trials were centrally randomised and open-label, with survival as primary endpoint. Analyses are presented by standard techniques, and within standardised risk groups Results Remission rates were not increased, but by significantly reducing the risk of relapse overall survival at 5 years was improved irrespective of patient age (30.7% vs 34.6%; HR 0.90 (95% CI 0.82-0.98), p=0.01). The survival benefit was particularly clear in those with favourable cytogenetics (55.2% vs 76.3%; HR0.47 (0.31-0.73), p=0.0005), but also observed in intermediate risk patients (34.1% vs 39.4%; HR 0.84 (0.75-0.95), p=0.007) Patients with adverse karyotype did not benefit overall or within any trial. Dose levels of 3mg/m2 were associated with less toxicity and equal efficacy. Interpretation GO can be safely added to conventional induction therapy. For patients who do not have adverse cytogenetics there is a significant survival benefit. These data suggest that the use of GO should be re-evaluated and the license status of GO may need to be reviewed. Role of funding source There was no funder for this meta-analysis.

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(14)70281-5

Cites

18 of 18 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 18 references

Cited by

See all 721

Metadata

Authors
Hills, R. K., Castaigne, S., Appelbaum, F. R., Delaunay, J., Petersdorf, S., Othus, M., Estey, E. H., Dombret, H., Chevret, S., Ifrah, N., Cahn, J.-Y., Récher, C., Chilton, L., Moorman, A. V., & Burnett, A. K.
Venue
The Lancet Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2014-08
Volume
15
Issue
9
Pages
986-996
ISSN
1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70281-5
OpenAlex
W2146862320
Cited by
721
References
18
FWCI
8.52
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: Addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70281-5
The paper
Hills, R. K., Castaigne, S., Appelbaum, F. R., Delaunay, J., Petersdorf, S., Othus, M., Estey, E. H., Dombret, H., Chevret, S., Ifrah, N., Cahn, J.-Y., Récher, C., Chilton, L., Moorman, A. V., & Burnett, A. K. (2014). Addition of gemtuzumab ozogamicin to induction chemotherapy in adult patients with acute myeloid leukaemia: a meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised controlled trials. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70281-5

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.