Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 577

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dose and Dose Intensity of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II, Node-Positive Breast Carcinoma

Open access
Wood, William C., Budman, Daniel R., Korzun, Ann H., Cooper, M. Robert, Younger, Jerry, Hart, Ronald D., Moore, Anne, Ellerton, John A., Norton, Larry, Ferree, Carolyn R., Ballow, Anita Colangelo, Frei, Emil, Henderson, I. Craig·1994·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant chemotherapy is widely used for breast cancer and is known to extend survival. Some clinicians seek a greater survival benefit by increasing the intensity of the dose, whereas others lower it to diminish toxicity. METHODS: The Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB) conducted a randomized trial of different levels of doses and dose intensity (dose per unit of time) of adjuvant chemotherapy in 1572 women with node-positive, stage II breast cancer who were assigned to three treatment groups. One group received 400 mg of cyclophosphamide per square meter of body-surface area and 40 mg of doxorubicin per square meter once every 28 days and 400 mg of fluorouracil per square meter twice every 28 days, for six cycles. Another group received 50 percent higher doses of the three drugs (600 mg, 60 mg, and 600 mg, respectively) but for only four cycles, so that the total dose was identical in these two groups but the dose intensity was higher in the first. The third group of women received half the total dose used in the other two groups and at half the dose intensity used in the second group. RESULTS: After a median of 3.4 years of follow-up, the women treated with a high or moderate dose intensity had significantly longer disease-free survival (P < 0.001) and overall survival (P = 0.004) than those treated with a low dose intensity, in three-way log-rank comparisons. However, the difference in survival between the two groups treated with a moderate or high dose intensity was not significant. These results are consistent with either a dose-response effect or a threshold level of the dose or dose intensity. CONCLUSIONS: The doses of chemotherapy used to treat breast cancer, especially early breast cancer, should not be reduced if the maximal benefit is to be achieved.

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/nejm199405053301801

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 577

Metadata

Authors
Wood, W. C., Budman, D. R., Korzun, A. H., Cooper, M. R., Younger, J., Hart, R. D., Moore, A., Ellerton, J. A., Norton, L., Ferree, C. R., Ballow, A. C., Frei, E., & Henderson, I. C.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
1994-05-05
Volume
330
Issue
18
Pages
1253-1259
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W2313308602
Cited by
577
References
3
FWCI
16.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Dose and Dose Intensity of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II, Node-Positive Breast Carcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejm199405053301801
The paper
Wood, W. C., Budman, D. R., Korzun, A. H., Cooper, M. R., Younger, J., Hart, R. D., Moore, A., Ellerton, J. A., Norton, L., Ferree, C. R., Ballow, A. C., Frei, E., & Henderson, I. C. (1994). Dose and Dose Intensity of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II, Node-Positive Breast Carcinoma. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejm199405053301801

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.