Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

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

HER2 and Choice of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Invasive Breast Cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15

Paik, S.·2000·Journal of the National Cancer Institute

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent retrospective analyses have suggested that breast cancer patients whose tumors overexpress HER2 derive preferential benefit from treatment with anthracyclines such as doxorubicin. This has led some clinicians to propose that HER2 should be used as a predictive marker in choosing between anthracycline-based regimens and combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and 5-fluorouracil (CMF). We evaluated this recommendation in a retrospective study of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15, in which patients received a combination of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC), CMF, or AC followed by CMF. We hypothesized that AC would be superior to CMF only in the HER2-positive patients. METHODS: Immunohistochemical detection of HER2 was performed on tumor sections from 2034 of 2295 eligible patients. We used statistical analysis to evaluate the interaction between the efficacy of the assigned treatments and HER2 overexpression. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Tumor sections from 599 patients (29%) stained positive for HER2. AC was superior to CMF in HER2-positive patients only, although differences in outcomes did not reach statistical significance. In the HER2-positive cohort, relative risks of failure (i.e., after AC treatment as compared with CMF treatment) were 0.84 for disease-free survival (DFS) (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.65--1.07; P =.15), 0.82 for survival (95% CI = 0.63--1.06; P =.14), and 0.80 for recurrence-free survival (RFS) (95% CI = 0.62--1.04; P =.10). Tests for interaction between treatment and HER2 status were suggestive but not statistically significant (P =.19 for DFS, P =.11 for survival, and P =.08 for RFS). CONCLUSIONS: These results, together with overview results indicating minor overall superiority for anthracycline-based regimens relative to CMF, indicate a preference for the AC regimen in patients with HER2-positive tumors. Both AC and CMF regimens may be considered for patients with HER2-negative tumors.

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/92.24.1991

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 304

Metadata

Authors
Paik, S.
Venue
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
Published
2000-12-20
Volume
92
Issue
24
Pages
1991-1998
ISSN
  • 0027-8874 (ISSN-L)
  • 1460-2105
OpenAlex
W2131374394
Cited by
304
References
6
FWCI
9.42
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: HER2 and Choice of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Invasive Breast Cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/jnci/92.24.1991
The paper
Paik, S. (2000). HER2 and Choice of Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Invasive Breast Cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-15. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/92.24.1991

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.