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; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Dose and Dose Intensity as Determinants of Outcome in the Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer

Budman, Daniel R., Berry, Donald A., Cirrincione, Constance T., Henderson,, I. Craig, Wood, William C., Weiss, Raymond B., Ferree, Carolyn R., Muss, Hyman B., Green, Mark R., Norton, Larry, Frei, Emil·1998·JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Both total dose and dose intensity of adjuvant chemotherapy are postulated to be important variables in the outcome for patients with operable breast cancer. The Cancer and Leukemia Group B study 8541 examined the effects of adjuvant treatment using conventional-range dose and dose intensity in female patients with stage II (axillary lymph node-positive) breast cancer. METHODS: Within 6 weeks of surgery (radical mastectomy, modified radical mastectomy, or lumpectomy), 1550 patients with unilateral breast cancer were randomly assigned to one of three treatment arms: high-, moderate-, or low-dose intensity. The patients received cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and 5-fluorouracil on day 1 of each chemotherapy cycle, with 5-fluorouracil administration repeated on day 8. The high-dose arm had twice the dose intensity and twice the drug dose as the low-dose arm. The moderate-dose arm had two thirds the dose intensity as the high-dose arm but the same total drug dose. Disease-free survival and overall survival were primary end points of the study. RESULTS: At a median follow-up of 9 years, disease-free survival and overall survival for patients on the moderate- and high-dose arms are superior to the corresponding survival measures for patients on the low-dose arm (two-sided P<.0001 and two-sided P = .004, respectively), with no difference in disease-free or overall survival between the moderate- and the high-dose arms. At 5 years, overall survival (average +/- standard error) is 79% +/- 2% for patients on the high-dose arm, 77% +/- 2% for the patients on the moderate-dose arm, and 72% +/- 2% for patients on the low-dose arm; disease-free survival is 66% +/- 2%, 61% +/- 2%, and 56% +/- 2%, respectively. CONCLUSION: Within the conventional dose range for this chemotherapy regimen, a higher dose is associated with better disease-free survival and overall survival.

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 · 10.1093/jnci/90.16.1205

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 577

Metadata

Authors
Budman, D. R., Berry, D. A., Cirrincione, C. T., Henderson, Wood, W. C., Weiss, R. B., Ferree, C. R., Muss, H. B., Green, M. R., Norton, L., & Frei, E.
Venue
JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
1998-08-19
Volume
90
Issue
16
Pages
1205-1211
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2136802843
Cited by
577
References
4
FWCI
11.79
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: Dose and Dose Intensity as Determinants of Outcome in the Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/90.16.1205
The paper
Budman, D. R., Berry, D. A., Cirrincione, C. T., Henderson, Wood, W. C., Weiss, R. B., Ferree, C. R., Muss, H. B., Green, M. R., Norton, L., & Frei, E. (1998). Dose and Dose Intensity as Determinants of Outcome in the Adjuvant Treatment of Breast Cancer. JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/90.16.1205

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.