The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparative Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Dukes' B Versus Dukes' C Colon Cancer: Results From Four National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Adjuvant Studies (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04)
Abstract
PURPOSE: Although the benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy has been clearly established in patients with Dukes' C colon cancer, such benefit has been questioned in patients with Dukes' B disease. To determine whether patients with Dukes' B disease benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and to evaluate the magnitude of the benefit, compared with that observed in Dukes' C patients, we examined the relative efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy according to Dukes' stage in four sequential National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project trials (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04) that compared different adjuvant chemotherapy regimens with each other or with no adjuvant treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The four trials included Dukes' B and C patients and were conducted between 1977 and 1990. The eligibility criteria and follow-up requirements were similar for all four trials. Protocol C-01 compared adjuvant semustine, vincristine, and fluorouracil (5-FU) (MOF regimen) with operation alone. Protocol C-02 compared the perioperative administration of a portal venous infusion of 5-FU with operation alone. Protocol C-03 compared adjuvant 5-FU and leucovorin (LV) with adjuvant MOF. Protocol C-04 compared adjuvant 5-FU and LV with 5-FU and levamisole (LEV) and with the combination of 5-FU, LV, and LEV. RESULTS: Forty-one percent of the patients included in these four trials had resected Dukes' B tumors. In all four studies, the overall, disease-free, and recurrence-free survival improvement noted for all patients was evident in both Dukes' B and Dukes' C patients. When the relative efficacy of chemotherapy was examined, there was always an observed reduction in mortality, recurrence, or disease-free survival event, irrespective of Dukes' stage, and in most instances, the reduction was as great or greater for Dukes' B patients as for Dukes' C patients. When data from all four trials were examined in a combined analysis, the mortality reduction was 30% for Dukes' B patients versus 18% for Dukes' C patients. The mortality reduction in Dukes' B patients occurred irrespective of the presence or absence of adverse prognostic factors. CONCLUSION: Patients with Dukes' B colon cancer benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy and should be presented with this treatment option. Regardless of the presence or absence of other clinical prognostic factors, Dukes' B patients seem to benefit from chemotherapy administration.
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
Statistical Aspects of the Analysis of Data From Retrospective Studies of Disease
(1959) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/22.4.719 · Cited by 14,689
Maximum utilization of the life table method in analyzing survival
Cutler, S. J., & Ederer, F. (1958) · Journal of Chronic Diseases · doi:10.1016/0021-9681(58)90126-7 · Cited by 2,870
Adjuvant Therapy for Patients With Colon and Rectal Cancer
(1990) · JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association · doi:10.1001/jama.1990.03450110090034 · Cited by 1,086
Cited by
Tie, J., Wang, Y., Tomasetti, C., Li, L., Springer, S., Kinde, I., Silliman, N., Tacey, M., Wong, H.-L., Christie, M., et al. (2016) · Science Translational Medicine · doi:10.1126/scitranslmed.aaf6219 · Cited by 1,492
Gill, S., Loprinzi, C. L., Sargent, D. J., Thomé, S. D., Alberts, S. R., Haller, D. G., Benedetti, J., Francini, G., Shepherd, L. E., Francois Seitz, J., et al. (2004) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2004.09.059 · Cited by 1,021
Mesker, W. E., Junggeburt, J. M. C., Szuhai, K., de Heer, P., Morreau, H., Tanke, H. J., & Tollenaar, R. A. E. M. (2007) · Analytical Cellular Pathology · doi:10.1155/2007/175276 · Cited by 354
O'Connell, M. J., Lavery, I., Yothers, G., Paik, S., Clark-Langone, K. M., Lopatin, M., Watson, D., Baehner, F. L., Shak, S., Baker, J., et al. (2010) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2010.28.9538 · Cited by 299
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Mamounas, E., Wieand, S., Wolmark, N., Bear, H. D., Atkins, J. N., Song, K., Jones, J., & Rockette, H.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1999-05
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 1349-1349
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2139393303
- Cited by
- 531
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 12.36
- 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: Comparative Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Dukes' B Versus Dukes' C Colon Cancer: Results From Four National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Adjuvant Studies (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1999.17.5.1349
- The paper
- Mamounas, E., Wieand, S., Wolmark, N., Bear, H. D., Atkins, J. N., Song, K., Jones, J., & Rockette, H. (1999). Comparative Efficacy of Adjuvant Chemotherapy in Patients With Dukes' B Versus Dukes' C Colon Cancer: Results From Four National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Adjuvant Studies (C-01, C-02, C-03, and C-04). Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1999.17.5.1349
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.