Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 364

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

Paclitaxel Versus Doxorubicin as First-Line Single-Agent Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study With Cross-Over

Paridaens, R., Biganzoli, L., Bruning, P., Klijn, J.G. M., Gamucci, T., Houston, S., Coleman, R., Schachter, J., Van Vreckem, A., Sylvester, R., Awada, A., Wildiers, J., Piccart, M., on behalf of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer/Early Clinical Studies Group·2000·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of paclitaxel versus doxorubicin given as single agents in first-line therapy of advanced breast cancer (primary end point, progression-free survival [PFS]) and to explore the degree of cross-resistance between the two agents. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Three hundred thirty-one patients were randomized to receive either paclitaxel 200 mg/m 2, 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks, or doxorubicin 75 mg/m 2, intravenous bolus every 3 weeks. Seven courses were planned unless progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred before the seven courses were finished. Patients who progressed within the seven courses underwent early cross-over to the alternative drug, while a delayed cross-over was optional for the remainder of patients at the time of disease progression. RESULTS: Objective response in first-line therapy was significantly better (P = .003) for doxorubicin (response rate [RR], 41%) than for paclitaxel (RR, 25%), with doxorubicin achieving a longer median PFS (7.5 months for doxorubicin v 3.9 months for paclitaxel, P < .001). In second-line therapy, cross-over to doxorubicin (91 patients) and to paclitaxel (77 patients) gave response rates of 30% and 16%, respectively. The median survival durations of 18.3 months for doxorubicin and 15.6 months for paclitaxel were not significantly different (P = .38). The doxorubicin arm had greater toxicity, but this was counterbalanced by better symptom control. CONCLUSION: At the dosages and schedules used in the present study, doxorubicin achieves better disease and symptom control than paclitaxel in first-line treatment. Doxorubicin and paclitaxel are not totally cross-resistant, which supports further investigation of these drugs in combination or in sequence, both in advanced disease and in the adjuvant setting.

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.2000.18.4.724

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

Cites

Show all 1 references

Cited by

See all 364

Metadata

Authors
Paridaens, R., Biganzoli, L., Bruning, P., Klijn, J. G. M., Gamucci, T., Houston, S., Coleman, R., Schachter, J., Van Vreckem, A., Sylvester, R., Awada, A., Wildiers, J., Piccart, M., & on behalf of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer/Early Clinical Studies Group
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2000-02-14
Volume
18
Issue
4
Pages
724-724
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W1940754997
Cited by
364
References
1
FWCI
9.86
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: Paclitaxel Versus Doxorubicin as First-Line Single-Agent Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study With Cross-Over. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2000.18.4.724
The paper
Paridaens, R., Biganzoli, L., Bruning, P., Klijn, J. G. M., Gamucci, T., Houston, S., Coleman, R., Schachter, J., Van Vreckem, A., Sylvester, R., Awada, A., Wildiers, J., Piccart, M., & on behalf of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer/Early Clinical Studies Group. (2000). Paclitaxel Versus Doxorubicin as First-Line Single-Agent Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer: A European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Randomized Study With Cross-Over. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2000.18.4.724

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.