Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 163

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

A Systematic Analysis of Efficacy of Second-Line Chemotherapy in Sensitive and Refractory Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Open access
Owonikoko, Taofeek K., Behera, Madhusmita, Chen, Zhengjia, Bhimani, Chandar, Curran, Walter J., Khuri, Fadlo R., Ramalingam, Suresh S.·2012·Journal of Thoracic Oncology

Abstract

Introduction: Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients unresponsive or relapsing within 90 days after frontline chemotherapy have poor prognosis and are treated with regimens different from the first-line regimen. Potential differences in the efficacy of second-line therapy for refractory and sensitive SCLC have not been well studied. Methods: Studies that enrolled sensitive and refractory (relapse < 90 days or > 90 days) SCLC patients for second-line therapy were identified using electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane library), and meeting abstracts databases. A systematic analysis was conducted using Comprehensive Meta Analysis (version 2.2.048) software to calculate the odds ratio of response and 95% confidence interval. Median overall survival time for sensitive and resistant SCLC patients was compared by two-sided Student’s t test. We tested for significant heterogeneity by Cochran’s chi-square test and I-square index. Results: Twenty-one studies published between 1984 and 2011 were eligible for this analysis with a total of 1692 patients enrolled; 912 with sensitive and 780 with refractory SCLC. The overall response rate was 17.9% with a higher response rate of 27.7% (range, 0%–77%) for sensitive SCLC versus 14.8% (range, 0%–70%) for refractory patients; p=0.0001. Pooled overall odds ratio of response was 2.235 (95% confidence interval: 1.518–3.291; p=0.001) favoring patients with sensitive disease. Median overall survival time was 6.7 months with a weighted survival of 7.7 and 5.4 months for sensitive and refractory SCLC, respectively (p = 0.0035). Conclusions: Refractory SCLC patients derive modest clinical benefit from second-line chemotherapy. However, response and survival outcomes are superior with chemosensitive disease.

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 · 10.1097/jto.0b013e31824c7f4b

Cites

1 of 1 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 1 references

Cited by

See all 163

Metadata

Authors
Owonikoko, T. K., Behera, M., Chen, Z., Bhimani, C., Curran, W. J., Khuri, F. R., & Ramalingam, S. S.
Venue
Journal of Thoracic Oncology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2012-05
Volume
7
Issue
5
Pages
866-872
ISSN
1556-0864 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2067056331
Cited by
163
References
1
FWCI
3.55
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: A Systematic Analysis of Efficacy of Second-Line Chemotherapy in Sensitive and Refractory Small-Cell Lung Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1097/jto.0b013e31824c7f4b
The paper
Owonikoko, T. K., Behera, M., Chen, Z., Bhimani, C., Curran, W. J., Khuri, F. R., & Ramalingam, S. S. (2012). A Systematic Analysis of Efficacy of Second-Line Chemotherapy in Sensitive and Refractory Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Journal of Thoracic Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1097/jto.0b013e31824c7f4b

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.