The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Randomized Trial of Dose-Dense Versus Conventionally Scheduled and Sequential Versus Concurrent Combination Chemotherapy as Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer: First Report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741
Abstract
Purpose: Using a 2 × 2 factorial design, we studied the adjuvant chemotherapy of women with axillary node–positive breast cancer to compare sequential doxorubicin (A), paclitaxel (T), and cyclophosphamide (C) with concurrent doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by paclitaxel (T) for disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS); to determine whether the dose density of the agents improves DFS and OS; and to compare toxicities. Patients and Methods: A total of 2,005 female patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the following regimens: (I) sequential A × 4 (doses) → T × 4 → C × 4 with doses every 3 weeks, (II) sequential A × 4 → T × 4 → C × 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim, (III) concurrent AC × 4 → T × 4 every 3 weeks, or (IV) concurrent AC × 4 → T × 4 every 2 weeks with filgrastim. Results: A protocol-specified analysis was performed at a median follow-up of 36 months: 315 patients had experienced relapse or died, compared with 515 expected treatment failures. Dose-dense treatment improved the primary end point, DFS (risk ratio [RR] = 0.74; P = .010), and OS (RR = 0.69; P = .013). Four-year DFS was 82% for the dose-dense regimens and 75% for the others. There was no difference in either DFS or OS between the concurrent and sequential schedules. There was no interaction between density and sequence. Severe neutropenia was less frequent in patients who received the dose-dense regimens. Conclusion: Dose density improves clinical outcomes significantly, despite the lower than expected number of events at this time. Sequential chemotherapy is as effective as concurrent chemotherapy.
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
(1990) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.27-3338 · Cited by 35,305
Cited by
Triple-negative breast cancer: challenges and opportunities of a heterogeneous disease
Bianchini, G., Balko, J. M., Mayer, I. A., Sanders, M. E., & Gianni, L. (2016) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/nrclinonc.2016.66 · Cited by 3,079
A view on drug resistance in cancer
Vasan, N., Baselga, J., & Hyman, D. M. (2019) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-019-1730-1 · Cited by 2,770
Early breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Cardoso, F., Kyriakides, S., Ohno, S., Penault-Llorca, F., Poortmans, P., Rubio, I. T., Zackrisson, S., & Senkus, E. (2019) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdz173 · Cited by 2,214
Contradicted and Initially Stronger Effects in Highly Cited Clinical Research
Ioannidis, J. P. A. (2005) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.294.2.218 · Cited by 1,465
Treatment landscape of triple-negative breast cancer — expanded options, evolving needs
Bianchini, G., De Angelis, C., Licata, L., & Gianni, L. (2022) · Nature Reviews Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1038/s41571-021-00565-2 · Cited by 1,382
Metadata
- Authors
- Citron, M. L., Berry, D. A., Cirrincione, C., Hudis, C., Winer, E. P., Gradishar, W. J., Davidson, N. E., Martino, S., Livingston, R., Ingle, J. N., Perez, E. A., Carpenter, J., Hurd, D., Holland, J. F., Smith, B. L., Sartor, C. I., Leung, E. H., Abrams, J., Schilsky, R. L., Muss, H. B., & Norton, L.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2003-04-15
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 8
- Pages
- 1431-1439
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2101760255
- Cited by
- 1,564
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 45.66
- 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: Randomized Trial of Dose-Dense Versus Conventionally Scheduled and Sequential Versus Concurrent Combination Chemotherapy as Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer: First Report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2003.09.081
- The paper
- Citron, M. L., Berry, D. A., Cirrincione, C., Hudis, C., Winer, E. P., Gradishar, W. J., Davidson, N. E., Martino, S., Livingston, R., Ingle, J. N., Perez, E. A., Carpenter, J., Hurd, D., Holland, J. F., Smith, B. L., Sartor, C. I., Leung, E. H., Abrams, J., Schilsky, R. L., . . . Norton, L. (2003). Randomized Trial of Dose-Dense Versus Conventionally Scheduled and Sequential Versus Concurrent Combination Chemotherapy as Postoperative Adjuvant Treatment of Node-Positive Primary Breast Cancer: First Report of Intergroup Trial C9741/Cancer and Leukemia Group B Trial 9741. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2003.09.081
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.