The DOI matches its Crossref record; 31 of the 31 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Effect of adding mFOLFOX6 after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre, phase 2 trial
Open accessAbstract
Summary Background Patients with locally advanced rectal cancer who achieve a pathological complete response to neoadjuvant chemoradiation have an improved prognosis. The need for surgery in these patients has been questioned, but the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response is small. We aimed to assess whether adding cycles of mFOLFOX6 between chemoradiation and surgery increased the proportion of patients achieving a pathological complete response. Methods We did a phase 2, non-randomised trial consisting of four sequential study groups of patients with stage II–III locally advanced rectal cancer at 17 institutions in the USA and Canada. All patients received chemoradiation (fluorouracil 225 mg/m2 per day by continuous infusion throughout radiotherapy, and 45.0 Gy in 25 fractions, 5 days per week for 5 weeks, followed by a minimum boost of 5.4 Gy). Patients in group 1 had total mesorectal excision 6–8 weeks after chemoradiation. Patients in groups 2–4 received two, four, or six cycles of mFOLFOX6, respectively, between chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision. Each cycle of mFOLFOX6 consisted of racemic leucovorin 200 mg/m2 or 400 mg/m2, according to the discretion of the treating investigator, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 in a 2-h infusion, bolus fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 on day 1, and a 46-h infusion of fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved a pathological complete response, analysed by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00335816. Findings Between March 24, 2004, and Nov 16, 2012, 292 patients were registered, 259 of whom (60 in group 1, 67 in group 2, 67 in group 3, and 65 in group 4) met criteria for analysis. 11 (18%, 95% CI 10–30) of 60 patients in group 1, 17 (25%, 16–37) of 67 in group 2, 20 (30%, 19–42) of 67 in group 3, and 25 (38%, 27–51) of 65 in group 4 achieved a pathological complete response (p=0.0036). Study group was independently associated with pathological complete response (group 4 compared with group 1 odds ratio 3.49, 95% CI 1.39–8.75; p=0.011). In group 2, two (3%) of 67 patients had grade 3 adverse events associated with the neoadjuvant administration of mFOLFOX6 and one (1%) had a grade 4 adverse event; in group 3, 12 (18%) of 67 patients had grade 3 adverse events; in group 4, 18 (28%) of 65 patients had grade 3 adverse events and five (8%) had grade 4 adverse events. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events associated with the neoadjuvant administration of mFOLFOX6 across groups 2-4 were neutropenia (five in group 3 and six in group 4) and lymphopenia (three in group 3 and four in group 4). Across all study groups, 25 grade 3 or worse surgery-related complications occurred (ten in group 1, five in group 2, three in group 3, and seven in group 4); the most common were pelvic abscesses (seven patients) and anastomotic leaks (seven patients). Interpretation Delivery of mFOLFOX6 after chemoradiation and before total mesorectal excision has the potential to increase the proportion of patients eligible for less invasive treatment strategies; this strategy is being tested in phase 3 clinical trials. Funding National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute R01 CA090559; and Core Grant P30 CA008748
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
New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid Tumors
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L., Verweij, J., Van Glabbeke, M., van Oosterom, A. T., Christian, M. C., et al. (2000) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205 · Cited by 15,660
The Clavien-Dindo Classification of Surgical Complications: Five-Year Experience
Clavien, P. A., Barkun, J., de Oliveira, M. L., Vauthey, J. N., Dindo, D., Schulick, R. D., de Santibañes, E., Pekolj, J., Slankamenac, K., Bassi, C., et al. (2009) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/sla.0b013e3181b13ca2 · Cited by 11,482
Preoperative versus Postoperative Chemoradiotherapy for Rectal Cancer
Sauer, R., Becker, H., Hohenberger, W., Rödel, C., Wittekind, C., Fietkau, R., Martus, P., Tschmelitsch, J., Hager, E., Hess, C. F., et al. (2004) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa040694 · Cited by 6,050
Maas, M., Nelemans, P. J., Valentini, V., Das, P., Rödel, C., Kuo, L.-J., Calvo, F. A., García-Aguilar, J., Glynne-Jones, R., Haustermans, K., et al. (2010) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70172-8 · Cited by 1,945
Habr-Gama, A., Perez, R. O., Nadalin, W., Sabbaga, J., Ribeiro, U., Silva e Sousa, A. H., Campos, F. G., Kiss, D. R., & Gama-Rodrigues, J. (2004) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000141194.27992.32 · Cited by 1,893
Francois, Y., Nemoz, C. J., Baulieux, J., Vignal, J., Grandjean, J.-P., Partensky, C., Souquet, J. C., Adeleine, P., & Gerard, J.-P. (1999) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2396 · Cited by 815
Aschele, C., Cionini, L., Lonardi, S., Pinto, C., Cordio, S., Rosati, G., Artale, S., Tagliagambe, A., Ambrosini, G., Rosetti, P., et al. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2010.34.4911 · Cited by 763
Rödel, C., Liersch, T., Becker, H., Fietkau, R., Hohenberger, W., Hothorn, T., Graeven, U., Arnold, D., Lang-Welzenbach, M., Raab, H.-R., et al. (2012) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(12)70187-0 · Cited by 696
O'Connell, M. J., Colangelo, L. H., Beart, R. W., Petrelli, N. J., Allegra, C. J., Sharif, S., Pitot, H. C., Shields, A. F., Landry, J. C., Ryan, D. P., et al. (2014) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2013.53.7753 · Cited by 439
Fernández-Martos, C., Pericay, C., Aparicio, J., Salud, A., Safont, M., Massuti, B., Vera, R., Escudero, P., Maurel, J., Marcuello, E., et al. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2009.25.8541 · Cited by 438
Cited by
Adoption of Total Neoadjuvant Therapy for Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Cercek, A., Roxburgh, C. S. D., Strombom, P., Smith, J. J., Temple, L. K. F., Nash, G. M., Guillem, J. G., Paty, P. B., Yaeger, R., Stadler, Z. K., et al. (2018) · JAMA Oncology · doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2018.0071 · Cited by 650
Self-citationThe multidisciplinary management of rectal cancer
Keller, D. S., Berho, M., Perez, R. O., Wexner, S. D., & Chand, M. (2020) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/s41575-020-0275-y · Cited by 359
Metadata
- Authors
- Garcia-Aguilar, J., Chow, O. S., Smith, D. D., Marcet, J. E., Cataldo, P. A., Varma, M. G., Kumar, A. S., Oommen, S., Coutsoftides, T., Hunt, S. R., Stamos, M. J., Ternent, C. A., Herzig, D. O., Fichera, A., Polite, B. N., Dietz, D. W., Patil, S., & Avila, K.
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2015-08
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 957-966
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1928621270
- Cited by
- 697
- References
- 31
- FWCI
- 18.33
- 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: Effect of adding mFOLFOX6 after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre, phase 2 trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00004-2
- The paper
- Garcia-Aguilar, J., Chow, O. S., Smith, D. D., Marcet, J. E., Cataldo, P. A., Varma, M. G., Kumar, A. S., Oommen, S., Coutsoftides, T., Hunt, S. R., Stamos, M. J., Ternent, C. A., Herzig, D. O., Fichera, A., Polite, B. N., Dietz, D. W., Patil, S., & Avila, K. (2015). Effect of adding mFOLFOX6 after neoadjuvant chemoradiation in locally advanced rectal cancer: a multicentre, phase 2 trial. The Lancet Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(15)00004-2
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.