Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,830

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Erlotinib in Lung Cancer — Molecular and Clinical Predictors of Outcome

Tsao, Ming-Sound, Sakurada, Akira, Cutz, Jean-Claude, Zhu, Chang-Qi, Kamel-Reid, Suzanne, Squire, Jeremy, Lorimer, Ian, Zhang, Tong, Liu, Ni, Daneshmand, Manijeh, Marrano, Paula, da Cunha Santos, Gilda, Lagarde, Alain, Richardson, Frank, Seymour, Lesley, Whitehead, Marlo, Ding, Keyue, Pater, Joseph, Shepherd, Frances A.·2005·New England Journal of Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: A clinical trial that compared erlotinib with a placebo for non-small-cell lung cancer demonstrated a survival benefit for erlotinib. We used tumor-biopsy samples from participants in this trial to investigate whether responsiveness to erlotinib and its impact on survival were associated with expression by the tumor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and EGFR gene amplification and mutations. METHODS: EGFR expression was evaluated immunohistochemically in non-small-cell lung cancer specimens from 325 of 731 patients in the trial; 197 samples were analyzed for EGFR mutations; and 221 samples were analyzed for the number of EGFR genes. RESULTS: In univariate analyses, survival was longer in the erlotinib group than in the placebo group when EGFR was expressed (hazard ratio for death, 0.68; P=0.02) or there was a high number of copies of EGFR (hazard ratio, 0.44; P=0.008). In multivariate analyses, adenocarcinoma (P=0.01), never having smoked (P<0.001), and expression of EGFR (P=0.03) were associated with an objective response. In multivariate analysis, survival after treatment with erlotinib was not influenced by the status of EGFR expression, the number of EGFR copies, or EGFR mutation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with non-small-cell lung cancer who receive erlotinib, the presence of an EGFR mutation may increase responsiveness to the agent, but it is not indicative of a survival benefit.

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/nejmoa050736

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Cited by

See all 1,830

Metadata

Authors
Tsao, M.-S., Sakurada, A., Cutz, J.-C., Zhu, C.-Q., Kamel-Reid, S., Squire, J., Lorimer, I., Zhang, T., Liu, N., Daneshmand, M., Marrano, P., da Cunha Santos, G., Lagarde, A., Richardson, F., Seymour, L., Whitehead, M., Ding, K., Pater, J., & Shepherd, F. A.
Venue
New England Journal of Medicine
Published
2005-07-14
Volume
353
Issue
2
Pages
133-144
ISSN
  • 0028-4793 (ISSN-L)
  • 1533-4406
OpenAlex
W1970476748
Cited by
1,830
References
6
FWCI
165.98
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: Erlotinib in Lung Cancer — Molecular and Clinical Predictors of Outcome. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1056/nejmoa050736
The paper
Tsao, M.-S., Sakurada, A., Cutz, J.-C., Zhu, C.-Q., Kamel-Reid, S., Squire, J., Lorimer, I., Zhang, T., Liu, N., Daneshmand, M., Marrano, P., da Cunha Santos, G., Lagarde, A., Richardson, F., Seymour, L., Whitehead, M., Ding, K., Pater, J., & Shepherd, F. A. (2005). Erlotinib in Lung Cancer — Molecular and Clinical Predictors of Outcome. New England Journal of Medicine. https://doi.org/10.1056/nejmoa050736

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.