Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Gefitinib Alone Versus Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy for Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Mutated Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: NEJ009 Study

Hosomi, Yukio, Morita, Satoshi, Sugawara, Shunichi, Kato, Terufumi, Fukuhara, Tatsuro, Gemma, Akihiko, Takahashi, Kazuhisa, Fujita, Yuka, Harada, Toshiyuki, Minato, Koichi, Takamura, Kei, Hagiwara, Koichi, Kobayashi, Kunihiko, Nukiwa, Toshihiro, Inoue, Akira, for the North-East Japan Study Group·2020·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor combined with cytotoxic chemotherapy is highly effective for the treatment of advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with EGFR mutations; however, little is known about the efficacy and safety of this combination compared with that of standard therapy with EGFR- tyrosine kinase inhibitors alone. METHODS: We randomly assigned 345 patients with newly diagnosed metastatic NSCLC with EGFR mutations to gefitinib combined with carboplatin plus pemetrexed or gefitinib alone. Progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2, and overall survival (OS) were sequentially analyzed as primary end points according to a hierarchical sequential testing method. Secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: The combination group demonstrated a better ORR and PFS than the gefitinib group (ORR, 84% v 67% [ P < .001]; PFS, 20.9 v 11.9 months; hazard ratio for death or disease progression, 0.490 [ P < .001]), although PFS2 was not significantly different (20.9 v 18.0 months; P = .092). Median OS in the combination group was also significantly longer than in the gefitinib group (50.9 v 38.8 months; hazard ratio for death, 0.722; P = .021). The rate of grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events, such as hematologic toxicities, in the combination group was higher than in the gefitinib group (65.3% v 31.0%); there were no differences in quality of life. One treatment-related death was observed in the combination group. CONCLUSION: Compared with gefitinib alone, gefitinib combined with carboplatin plus pemetrexed improved PFS in patients with untreated advanced NSCLC with EGFR mutations with an acceptable toxicity profile, although its OS benefit requires further validation.

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 · 10.1200/jco.19.01488

Cites

19 of 19 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 19 references

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Hosomi, Y., Morita, S., Sugawara, S., Kato, T., Fukuhara, T., Gemma, A., Takahashi, K., Fujita, Y., Harada, T., Minato, K., Takamura, K., Hagiwara, K., Kobayashi, K., Nukiwa, T., Inoue, A., & for the North-East Japan Study Group
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2020-01-10
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
115-123
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2987053327
Cited by
481
References
19
FWCI
41.35
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: Gefitinib Alone Versus Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy for Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Mutated Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: NEJ009 Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.19.01488
The paper
Hosomi, Y., Morita, S., Sugawara, S., Kato, T., Fukuhara, T., Gemma, A., Takahashi, K., Fujita, Y., Harada, T., Minato, K., Takamura, K., Hagiwara, K., Kobayashi, K., Nukiwa, T., Inoue, A., & for the North-East Japan Study Group. (2020). Gefitinib Alone Versus Gefitinib Plus Chemotherapy for Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer With Mutated Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor: NEJ009 Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.19.01488

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.