Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 276

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Non-Randomized Controls in Cancer Clinical Trials

Gehan, Edmund A., Freireich, Emil J·1974·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

Abstract Quantitative, comparative clinical trials can sometimes be better accomplished with technics other than randomization for selection of a control group. These include selection of literature controls, matched controls and controls from a previous study. Such controls have permitted detection of therapeutic activity for many anti-cancer agents. Circumstances of greatest utility are as follows: when the primary purpose of study is to estimate effectiveness of treatment; when large differences in response rate are expected on the basis of preliminary studies; or when the new therapy would only be interesting if it was substantially more effective than the standard. When a new therapy is to be evaluated, clinical investigators must consider both ethical responsibility to administer best available therapy and scientific responsibility to conduct a proper evaluation. Selected control patients can permit valid evaluation of a new therapy without the requirement of prescribing control therapy known to be ineffective. (N Engl J Med 290:198–203, 1974)

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 · 10.1056/nejm197401242900405

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.

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

Cited by

See all 276

Metadata

Authors
Gehan, E. A., & Freireich, E. J.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1974-01-24
Volume
290
Issue
4
Pages
198-203
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2023747410
Cited by
276
References
0
FWCI
18.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Non-Randomized Controls in Cancer Clinical Trials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm197401242900405
The paper
Gehan, E. A., & Freireich, E. J. (1974). Non-Randomized Controls in Cancer Clinical Trials. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm197401242900405

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.