Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 1,430

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer

Open access
Benson, Al B., Schrag, Deborah, Somerfield, Mark R., Cohen, Alfred M., Figueredo, Alvaro T., Flynn, Patrick J., Krzyzanowska, Monika K., Maroun, Jean, McAllister, Pamela, Van Cutsem, Eric, Brouwers, Melissa, Charette, Manya, Haller, Daniel G.·2004·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To address whether all medically fit patients with curatively resected stage II colon cancer should be offered adjuvant chemotherapy as part of routine clinical practice, to identify patients with poor prognosis characteristics, and to describe strategies for oncologists to use to discuss adjuvant chemotherapy in practice. Methods: An American Society of Clinical Oncology Panel, in collaboration with the Cancer Care Ontario Practice Guideline Initiative, reviewed pertinent information from the literature through May 2003. Results: A literature-based meta-analysis found no evidence of a statistically significant survival benefit of adjuvant chemotherapy for stage II patients. Recommendations: The routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for medically fit patients with stage II colon cancer is not recommended. However, there are populations of patients with stage II disease that could be considered for adjuvant therapy, including patients with inadequately sampled nodes, T4 lesions, perforation, or poorly differentiated histology. Conclusion: Direct evidence from randomized controlled trials does not support the routine use of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with stage II colon cancer. Patients and oncologists who accept the relative benefit in stage III disease as adequate indirect evidence of benefit for stage II disease are justified in considering the use of adjuvant chemotherapy, particularly for those patients with high-risk stage II disease. The ultimate clinical decision should be based on discussions with the patient about the nature of the evidence supporting treatment, the anticipated morbidity of treatment, the presence of high-risk prognostic features on individual prognosis, and patient preferences. Patients with stage II disease should be encouraged to participate in randomized trials.

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.2004.05.063

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 1,430

Metadata

Authors
Benson, A. B., Schrag, D., Somerfield, M. R., Cohen, A. M., Figueredo, A. T., Flynn, P. J., Krzyzanowska, M. K., Maroun, J., McAllister, P., Van Cutsem, E., Brouwers, M., Charette, M., & Haller, D. G.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2004-08-15
Volume
22
Issue
16
Pages
3408-3419
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2141768150
Cited by
1,430
References
2
FWCI
22.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2004.05.063
The paper
Benson, A. B., Schrag, D., Somerfield, M. R., Cohen, A. M., Figueredo, A. T., Flynn, P. J., Krzyzanowska, M. K., Maroun, J., McAllister, P., Van Cutsem, E., Brouwers, M., Charette, M., & Haller, D. G. (2004). American Society of Clinical Oncology Recommendations on Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Stage II Colon Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2004.05.063

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.