Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 499

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 28 of the 28 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Cisplatin and Etoposide Regimen Is Superior to Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, and Vincristine Regimen in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial With 5 Years’ Follow-Up

Sundstrøm, Stein, Bremnes, Roy M., Kaasa, Stein, Aasebø, Ulf, Hatlevoll, Reidulv, Dahle, Ragnar, Boye, Nils, Wang, Mari, Vigander, Tor, Vilsvik, Jan, Skovlund, Eva, Hannisdal, Einar, Aamdal, Steinar·2002·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

PURPOSE: To investigate whether chemotherapy with etoposide and cisplatin (EP) is superior to cyclophosphamide, epirubicin, and vincristine (CEV) in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 436 eligible patients were randomized to chemotherapy with EP (n = 218) or CEV (n = 218). Patients were stratified according to extent of disease (limited disease [LD], n = 214; extensive disease [ED], n = 222). The EP group received five courses of etoposide 100 mg/m 2 intravenously (IV) and cisplatin 75 mg/m 2 IV on day 1, followed by oral etoposide 200 mg/m 2 daily on days 2 to 4. The CEV group received five courses of epirubicin 50 mg/m 2, cyclophosphamide 1,000 mg/m 2, and vincristine 2 mg, all IV on day 1. In addition, LD patients received thoracic radiotherapy concurrent with chemotherapy cycle 3, and those achieving complete remission during the treatment period received prophylactic cranial irradiation. RESULTS: The treatment groups were well balanced with regard to age, sex, and prognostic factors such as weight loss, and performance status. The 2- and 5-year survival rates in the EP arm (14% and 5%, P = .0004) were significantly higher compared with those in the CEV arm (6% and 2%). Among LD patients, median survival time was 14.5 months versus 9.7 months in the EP and CEV arms, respectively (P = .001). The 2- and 5-year survival rates of 25% and 10% in the EP arm compared with 8% and 3% in the CEV arm (P = .0001). For ED patients, there was no significant survival difference between the treatment arms. Quality-of-life assessments revealed no major differences between the randomized groups. CONCLUSION: EP is superior to CEV in LD-SCLC patients. In ED-SCLC patients, the benefits of EP and CEV chemotherapy seem equivalent, with similar survival time and quality of life.

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.2002.12.111

Cites

28 of 28 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 28 references

Cited by

See all 499

Metadata

Authors
Sundstrøm, S., Bremnes, R. M., Kaasa, S., Aasebø, U., Hatlevoll, R., Dahle, R., Boye, N., Wang, M., Vigander, T., Vilsvik, J., Skovlund, E., Hannisdal, E., & Aamdal, S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2002-12-15
Volume
20
Issue
24
Pages
4665-4672
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2150878803
Cited by
499
References
28
FWCI
5.90
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: Cisplatin and Etoposide Regimen Is Superior to Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, and Vincristine Regimen in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial With 5 Years’ Follow-Up. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2002.12.111
The paper
Sundstrøm, S., Bremnes, R. M., Kaasa, S., Aasebø, U., Hatlevoll, R., Dahle, R., Boye, N., Wang, M., Vigander, T., Vilsvik, J., Skovlund, E., Hannisdal, E., & Aamdal, S. (2002). Cisplatin and Etoposide Regimen Is Superior to Cyclophosphamide, Epirubicin, and Vincristine Regimen in Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial With 5 Years’ Follow-Up. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2002.12.111

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.