Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 981

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A randomized comparison of cisplatin alone or in combination with methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a cooperative group study.

Loehrer, P J, Einhorn, L H, Elson, P J, Crawford, E D, Kuebler, P, Tannock, I, Raghavan, D, Stuart-Harris, R, Sarosdy, M F, Lowe, B A·1992·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: A prospective randomized trial was performed to determine if the addition of methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin to cisplatin (M-VAC) imparted a response rate or a survival advantage over single-agent cisplatin in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From October 1984 through May 1989, 269 patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma were entered onto this international intergroup trial and randomized to receive intravenous (IV) cisplatin (70 mg/m2) alone or with methotrexate (30 mg/m2 on days 1, 15, 22), vinblastine (3 mg/m2 on days 2, 15, 22) plus doxorubicin (30 mg/m2 on day 2). Cycles were repeated every 28 days until tumor progression or a maximum of six cycles. There were 246 fully assessable patients of whom 126 were randomized to cisplatin alone and 120 were randomized to the M-VAC regimen. RESULTS: As expected, the M-VAC regimen was associated with a greater toxicity, especially leukopenia, mucositis, granulocytopenic fever, and drug-related mortality. Response rates were superior for the M-VAC regimen compared with single-agent cisplatin (39% v 12%; P less than .0001). Similarly, the progression-free survival (10.0 v 4.3 months) and overall survival (12.5 v 8.2 months) were significantly greater for the combined therapy arm. CONCLUSION: Although a more toxic regimen, we found M-VAC to be superior to single-agent cisplatin with respect to response rate, duration of remission, and overall survival in patients with advanced urothelial carcinoma.

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.1992.10.7.1066

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.

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

Cited by

See all 981

Metadata

Authors
Loehrer, P. J., Einhorn, L. H., Elson, P. J., Crawford, E. D., Kuebler, P., Tannock, I., Raghavan, D., Stuart-Harris, R., Sarosdy, M. F., & Lowe, B. A.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1992-07
Volume
10
Issue
7
Pages
1066-1073
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1893740135
Cited by
981
References
0
FWCI
20.28
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: A randomized comparison of cisplatin alone or in combination with methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a cooperative group study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1992.10.7.1066
The paper
Loehrer, P. J., Einhorn, L. H., Elson, P. J., Crawford, E. D., Kuebler, P., Tannock, I., Raghavan, D., Stuart-Harris, R., Sarosdy, M. F., & Lowe, B. A. (1992). A randomized comparison of cisplatin alone or in combination with methotrexate, vinblastine, and doxorubicin in patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a cooperative group study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1992.10.7.1066

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.