Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 890

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 18 of the 18 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Hydrocortisone With or Without Mitoxantrone in Men With Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer: Results of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9182 Study

Kantoff, Philip W., Halabi, Susan, Conaway, Mark, Picus, Joel, Kirshner, Jeffrey, Hars, Vera, Trump, Donald, Winer, Eric P., Vogelzang, Nicholas J.·1999·Journal of Clinical Oncology
DOI 10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2506
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

PURPOSE: Approximately 40,000 men die each year of hormone-refractory prostate cancer (HRPC). The results of treatment with chemotherapy have been disappointing to date, with no trials demonstrating a benefit with respect to survival duration. Corticosteroids and mitoxantrone each have been shown to be active agents in this disease. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate an advantage of mitoxantrone and hydrocortisone (M+H) over hydrocortisone alone with respect to survival duration. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two hundred forty-two patients with HRPC were randomized to receive either M+H or hydrocortisone alone. Patients were monitored for survival, time to disease progression, time to treatment failure, response, and quality-of-life (QOL) parameters. RESULTS: Treatment in both arms was well tolerated. Although there was a delay in time to treatment failure and disease progression in favor of M+H over hydrocortisone alone, there was no difference in overall survival (12.3 months for M+H v 12.6 months for hydrocortisone alone). There was an indication that QOL was better with M+H, in particular with respect to pain control. CONCLUSION: M+H generated more frequent responses and a delay in both time to treatment failure and disease progression compared with hydrocortisone alone. In addition, there was a possible benefit of M+H with respect to pain control over hydrocortisone alone. No improvement in survival was observed. Although M+H could be viewed as a palliative option for patients with HRPC, new drugs and novel strategies are needed to improve survival for this disease.

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.1999.17.8.2506

Cites

18 of 18 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 18 references

Cited by

See all 890

Metadata

Authors
Kantoff, P. W., Halabi, S., Conaway, M., Picus, J., Kirshner, J., Hars, V., Trump, D., Winer, E. P., & Vogelzang, N. J.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Published
1999-08
Volume
17
Issue
8
Pages
2506-2506
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
DOI
10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2506
OpenAlex
W1854708637
Cited by
890
References
18
FWCI
34.70
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: Hydrocortisone With or Without Mitoxantrone in Men With Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer: Results of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9182 Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2506
The paper
Kantoff, P. W., Halabi, S., Conaway, M., Picus, J., Kirshner, J., Hars, V., Trump, D., Winer, E. P., & Vogelzang, N. J. (1999). Hydrocortisone With or Without Mitoxantrone in Men With Hormone-Refractory Prostate Cancer: Results of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B 9182 Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1999.17.8.2506

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.