Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 908

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

Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus with bimonthly high-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus plus continuous infusion for advanced colorectal cancer: a French intergroup study.

de Gramont, A, Bosset, J F, Milan, C, Rougier, P, Bouché, O, Etienne, P L, Morvan, F, Louvet, C, Guillot, T, François, E, Bedenne, L·1997·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: This multicenter study compared the therapeutic ratio of a monthly schedule of low-dose leucovorin (LV) and fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus with a bimonthly schedule of high-dose LV and 5-FU bolus plus continuous infusion in patients with advanced colorectal cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Of the 448 patients randomly assigned to treatment, 433 were assessable. Treatment A was a monthly regimen of intravenous (IV) LV 20 mg/m2 plus bolus 5-FU 425 mg/m2 for 5 days every 4 weeks. Treatment B was a bimonthly regimen of IV LV 200 mg/m2 as a 2-hour infusion followed by bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m2 and 22-hour infusion 5-FU 600 mg/m2 for 2 consecutive days every 2 weeks. Therapy was continued until disease progression. Second-line chemotherapy, which included 5-FU continuous infusion, was allowed in both arms. RESULTS: The response rates in 348 patients with measurable lesions were 14.4% (monthly regimen) and 32.6% (bimonthly regimen) (P = .0004). The median progression-free survival times were 22 weeks (monthly regimen) and 27.6 weeks (bimonthly regimen) (P = .0012). The median survival times were 56.8 weeks (monthly regimen) and 62 weeks (bimonthly regimen) (P = .067). Grade 3-4 toxicities occurred in 23.9% of patients in the monthly arm compared with 11.1% of those in the bimonthly arm (P = .0004). Patients in arm A more frequently experienced severe granulocytopenia (7.3% v 1.9%), diarrhea (7.3% v 2.9%), and mucositis (7.3% v 1.9%) than patients in arm B. CONCLUSION: The bimonthly regimen was more effective and less toxic than the monthly regimen and definitely increased the therapeutic ratio. However, there was no evidence of increased survival.

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.1997.15.2.808

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

Cited by

See all 908

Metadata

Authors
de Gramont, A., Bosset, J. F., Milan, C., Rougier, P., Bouché, O., Etienne, P. L., Morvan, F., Louvet, C., Guillot, T., François, E., & Bedenne, L.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
1997-02
Volume
15
Issue
2
Pages
808-815
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1941365207
Cited by
908
References
1
FWCI
13.75
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: Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus with bimonthly high-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus plus continuous infusion for advanced colorectal cancer: a French intergroup study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1997.15.2.808
The paper
de Gramont, A., Bosset, J. F., Milan, C., Rougier, P., Bouché, O., Etienne, P. L., Morvan, F., Louvet, C., Guillot, T., François, E., & Bedenne, L. (1997). Randomized trial comparing monthly low-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus with bimonthly high-dose leucovorin and fluorouracil bolus plus continuous infusion for advanced colorectal cancer: a French intergroup study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1997.15.2.808

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.