Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,182

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Circulating Tumor Cells Predict Survival Benefit from Treatment in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer

de Bono, Johann S., Scher, Howard I., Montgomery, R. Bruce, Parker, Christopher, Miller, M. Craig, Tissing, Henk, Doyle, Gerald V., Terstappen, Leon W.W.M., Pienta, Kenneth J., Raghavan, Derek·2008·Clinical Cancer Research

Abstract

Purpose: A method for enumerating circulating tumor cells (CTC) has received regulatory clearance. The primary objective of this prospective study was to establish the relationship between posttreatment CTC count and overall survival (OS) in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Secondary objectives included determining the prognostic utility of CTC measurement before initiating therapy, and the relationship of CTC to prostate-specific antigen (PSA) changes and OS at these and other time points. Experimental Design: Blood was drawn from CRPC patients with progressive disease starting a new line of chemotherapy before treatment and monthly thereafter. Patients were stratified into predetermined Favorable or Unfavorable groups (<5 and ≥5 CTC/7.5mL). Results: Two hundred thirty-one of 276 enrolled patients (84%) were evaluable. Patients with Unfavorable pretreatment CTC (57%) had shorter OS (median OS, 11.5 versus 21.7 months; Cox hazard ratio, 3.3; P < 0.0001). Unfavorable posttreatment CTC counts also predicted shorter OS at 2 to 5, 6 to 8, 9 to 12, and 13 to 20 weeks (median OS, 6.7-9.5 versus 19.6-20.7 months; Cox hazard ratio, 3.6-6.5; P < 0.0001). CTC counts predicted OS better than PSA decrement algorithms at all time points; area under the receiver operator curve for CTC was 81% to 87% and 58% to 68% for 30% PSA reduction (P = 0.0218). Prognosis for patients with (a) Unfavorable baseline CTC who converted to Favorable CTC improved (6.8 to 21.3 months); (b) Favorable baseline CTC who converted to Unfavorable worsened (>26 to 9.3 months). Conclusions: CTC are the most accurate and independent predictor of OS in CRPC. These data led to Food and Drug Administration clearance of this assay for the evaluation of CRPC.

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 · 10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-0872

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 2,182

Metadata

Authors
de Bono, J. S., Scher, H. I., Montgomery, R. B., Parker, C., Miller, M. C., Tissing, H., Doyle, G. V., Terstappen, L. W. W. M., Pienta, K. J., & Raghavan, D.
Venue
Clinical Cancer Research
Published
2008-09-30
Volume
14
Issue
19
Pages
6302-6309
ISSN
  • 1078-0432 (ISSN-L)
  • 1557-3265
OpenAlex
W2148998801
Cited by
2,182
References
2
FWCI
67.06
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: Circulating Tumor Cells Predict Survival Benefit from Treatment in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-0872
The paper
de Bono, J. S., Scher, H. I., Montgomery, R. B., Parker, C., Miller, M. C., Tissing, H., Doyle, G. V., Terstappen, L. W. W. M., Pienta, K. J., & Raghavan, D. (2008). Circulating Tumor Cells Predict Survival Benefit from Treatment in Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer. Clinical Cancer Research. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-0872

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.