Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 2,279

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin in Advanced or Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Results of a Large, Randomized, Multinational, Multicenter, Phase III Study

Open access
von der Maase, H., Hansen, S.W., Roberts, J.T., Dogliotti, L., Oliver, T., Moore, M.J., Bodrogi, I., Albers, P., Knuth, A., Lippert, C.M., Kerbrat, P., Sanchez Rovira, P., Wersall, P., Cleall, S.P., Roychowdhury, D.F., Tomlin, I., Visseren-Grul, C.M., Conte, P.F.·2000·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: Gemcitabine plus cisplatin (GC) and methotrexate, vinblastine, doxorubicin, and cisplatin (MVAC) were compared in patients with locally advanced or metastatic transitional-cell carcinoma (TCC) of the urothelium. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with stage IV TCC and no prior systemic chemotherapy were randomized to GC (gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 days 1, 8, and 15; cisplatin 70 mg/m 2 day 2) or standard MVAC every 28 days for a maximum of six cycles. RESULTS: Four hundred five patients were randomized (GC, n = 203; MVAC, n = 202). The groups were well-balanced with respect to prognostic factors. Overall survival was similar on both arms (hazards ratio [HR], 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.82 to 1.32; P = .75), as were time to progressive disease (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.30), time to treatment failure (HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.10), and response rate (GC, 49%; MVAC, 46%). More GC patients completed six cycles of therapy, with fewer dose adjustments. The toxic death rate was 1% on the GC arm and 3% on the MVAC arm. More GC than MVAC patients had grade 3/4 anemia (27% v 18%, respectively) and thrombocytopenia (57% v 21%, respectively). On both arms, the RBC transfusion rate was 13 of 100 cycles and grade 3/4 hemorrhage or hematuria was 2%; the platelet transfusion rate was four patients per 100 cycles and two patients per 100 cycles on GC and MVAC, respectively. More MVAC patients, compared with GC patients, had grade 3/4 neutropenia (82% v 71%, respectively), neutropenic fever (14% v 2%, respectively), neutropenic sepsis (12% v 1%, respectively), and grade 3/4 mucositis (22% v 1%, respectively) and alopecia (55% v 11%, respectively). Quality of life was maintained during treatment on both arms; however, more patients on GC fared better regarding weight, performance status, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: GC provides a similar survival advantage to MVAC with a better safety profile and tolerability. This better-risk benefit ratio should change the standard of care for patients with locally advanced and metastatic TCC from MVAC to GC.

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.2000.18.17.3068

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 2,279

Metadata

Authors
von der Maase, H., Hansen, S. W., Roberts, J. T., Dogliotti, L., Oliver, T., Moore, M. J., Bodrogi, I., Albers, P., Knuth, A., Lippert, C. M., Kerbrat, P., Sanchez Rovira, P., Wersall, P., Cleall, S. P., Roychowdhury, D. F., Tomlin, I., Visseren-Grul, C. M., & Conte, P. F.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2000-09-17
Volume
18
Issue
17
Pages
3068-3077
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2101562875
Cited by
2,279
References
0
FWCI
49.16
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin in Advanced or Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Results of a Large, Randomized, Multinational, Multicenter, Phase III Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2000.18.17.3068
The paper
von der Maase, H., Hansen, S. W., Roberts, J. T., Dogliotti, L., Oliver, T., Moore, M. J., Bodrogi, I., Albers, P., Knuth, A., Lippert, C. M., Kerbrat, P., Sanchez Rovira, P., Wersall, P., Cleall, S. P., Roychowdhury, D. F., Tomlin, I., Visseren-Grul, C. M., & Conte, P. F. (2000). Gemcitabine and Cisplatin Versus Methotrexate, Vinblastine, Doxorubicin, and Cisplatin in Advanced or Metastatic Bladder Cancer: Results of a Large, Randomized, Multinational, Multicenter, Phase III Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2000.18.17.3068

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.