The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer: an overview of randomised clinical trials. Advanced Ovarian Cancer Trialists Group.
Open accessAbstract
OBJECTIVES: To consider the role of platinum and the relative merits of single agent and combination chemotherapy in the treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. DESIGN: Formal quantitative overview using updated individual patient data from all available randomised trials (published and unpublished). SUBJECTS: 8139 patients (6408 deaths) included in 45 different trials. RESULTS: No firm conclusions could be reached. Nevertheless, the results suggest that in terms of survival immediate platinum based treatment was better than non-platinum regimens (overall relative risk 0.93; 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 1.05); platinum in combination was better than single agent platinum when used in the same dose (overall relative risk 0.85; 0.72 to 1.00); and cisplatin and carboplatin were equally effective (overall relative risk 1.05; 0.94 to 1.18). CONCLUSIONS: In the past, randomised clinical trials of chemotherapy in advanced ovarian cancer have been much too small to detect the degree of benefit which this overview suggests is realistic for currently available chemotherapeutic regimens. Hence a new trial comparing cisplatin, doxorubicin, and cyclophosphamide (CAP) with carboplatin has been launched and plans to accrue 2000 patients.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Publication bias: the case for an international registry of clinical trials.
Simes, R. J. (1986) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.1986.4.10.1529 · Cited by 747
Cited by
CHALMERS, I. (1993) · Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1993.tb26345.x · Cited by 561
A brief history of research synthesis
Chalmers, I., Hedges, L. V., & Cooper, H. (2002) · Evaluation & the Health Professions · doi:10.1177/0163278702025001003 · Cited by 552
Kyrgiou, M., Salanti, G., Pavlidis, N., Paraskevaidis, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2006) · JNCI Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/djj443 · Cited by 187
Mutational spectrum of p53 mutations in primary breast and ovarian tumors
Feki, A., & Irminger-Finger, I. (2004) · Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology · doi:10.1016/j.critrevonc.2004.07.002 · Cited by 139
Overcoming the road blocks: advancement of block copolymer micelles for cancer therapy in the clinic
Houdaihed, L., Evans, J. C., & Allen, C. (2017) · Molecular Pharmaceutics · doi:10.1021/acs.molpharmaceut.7b00188 · Cited by 91
Mahner, S., Meier, W., du Bois, A., Brown, C., Lorusso, D., Dell’Anna, T., Cretin, J., Havsteen, H., Bessette, P., Zeimet, A. G., et al. (2015) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2014.11.017 · Cited by 70
Metadata
- Venue
- BMJ
- Publisher
- BMJ
- Published
- 1991-10-12
- Volume
- 303
- Issue
- 6807
- Pages
- 884-893
- ISSN
- 0007-1447 (ISSN-L)
- 0959-8138
- 1468-5833
- OpenAlex
- W4210704032
- Cited by
- 300
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 26.23
- 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
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.
