Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 683

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

Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer

Heinemann, Volker, Quietzsch, Detlef, Gieseler, Frank, Gonnermann, Michael, Schönekäs, Herbert, Rost, Andreas, Neuhaus, Horst, Haag, Caroline, Clemens, Michael, Heinrich, Bernard, Vehling-Kaiser, Ursula, Fuchs, Martin, Fleckenstein, Doris, Gesierich, Wolfgang, Uthgenannt, Dirk, Einsele, Hermann, Holstege, Axel, Hinke, Axel, Schalhorn, Andreas, Wilkowski, Ralf·2006·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To compare the effectiveness and tolerability of gemcitabine plus cisplatin with single-agent gemcitabine as first-line chemotherapy for locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Patients and Methods: Patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomly assigned to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 and cisplatin 50 mg/m 2 given on days 1 and 15 of a 4-week cycle (GemCis arm) or gemcitabine alone at a dose of 1,000 mg/m 2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 4-week regimen (Gem arm). The primary end point was overall survival; secondary end points were progression-free survival, response rate, safety, and quality of life. Results: One hundred ninety-five patients were enrolled and showed baseline characteristics well balanced between treatment arms. Combination treatment in the GemCis arm was associated with a prolonged median progression-free survival (5.3 months v 3.1 months; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.75; P = .053). Also, median overall survival was superior for patients treated in the GemCis arm as compared with the Gem arm (7.5 v 6.0 months), an advantage which did not, however, reach statistical significance (HR = 0.80; P = .15). Tumor response rates were comparable between treatment arms (10.2% v 8.2%). The rate of stable disease was, however, greater in the combination arm (60.2% v 40.2%; P < .001). Grade 3 to 4 hematologic toxicity did not exceed 15% in both treatment arms. Conclusion: These results support the efficacy and safety of an every-2-weeks treatment with gemcitabine plus cisplatin. Median overall survival and progression-free survival were more favorable in the combination arm as compared with gemcitabine alone, although the difference did not attain statistical significance.

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.2005.05.1490

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 683

Metadata

Authors
Heinemann, V., Quietzsch, D., Gieseler, F., Gonnermann, M., Schönekäs, H., Rost, A., Neuhaus, H., Haag, C., Clemens, M., Heinrich, B., Vehling-Kaiser, U., Fuchs, M., Fleckenstein, D., Gesierich, W., Uthgenannt, D., Einsele, H., Holstege, A., Hinke, A., Schalhorn, A., & Wilkowski, R.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2006-08-20
Volume
24
Issue
24
Pages
3946-3952
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2101465269
Cited by
683
References
1
FWCI
21.08
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 Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2005.05.1490
The paper
Heinemann, V., Quietzsch, D., Gieseler, F., Gonnermann, M., Schönekäs, H., Rost, A., Neuhaus, H., Haag, C., Clemens, M., Heinrich, B., Vehling-Kaiser, U., Fuchs, M., Fleckenstein, D., Gesierich, W., Uthgenannt, D., Einsele, H., Holstege, A., Hinke, A., Schalhorn, A., & Wilkowski, R. (2006). Randomized Phase III Trial of Gemcitabine Plus Cisplatin Compared With Gemcitabine Alone in Advanced Pancreatic Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.05.1490

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.