Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 290

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

Phase I and Correlative Biology Study of Cilengitide in Patients With Recurrent Malignant Glioma

Open access
Nabors, L. Burt, Mikkelsen, Tom, Rosenfeld, Steven S., Hochberg, Fred, Akella, Narasimha S., Fisher, Joy D., Cloud, Gretchen A., Zhang, Yu, Carson, Kathryn, Wittemer, Sabine M., Colevas, A. Dimitrios, Grossman, Stuart A.·2007·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: This multi-institutional phase I trial was designed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of cilengitide (EMD 121974) and to evaluate the use of perfusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) in patients with recurrent malignant glioma. Patients and Methods: Patients received cilengitide twice weekly on a continuous basis. A treatment cycle was defined as 4 weeks. Treatment-related dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined as any grade 3 or 4 nonhematologic toxicity or grade 4 hematologic toxicity of any duration. Results: A total of 51 patients were enrolled in cohorts of six patients to doses of 120, 240, 360, 480, 600, 1,200, 1,800, and 2,400 mg/m 2 administered as a twice weekly intravenous infusion. Three patients progressed early and were inevaluable for toxicity assessment. The DLTs observed were one thrombosis (120 mg/m 2), one grade 4 joint and bone pain (480 mg/m 2), one thrombocytopenia (600 mg/m 2) and one anorexia, hypoglycemia, and hyponatremia (800 mg/m 2). The MTD was not reached. Two patients demonstrated complete response, three patients had partial response, and four patients had stable disease. Perfusion MRI revealed a significant relationship between the change in tumor relative cerebral blood flow (rCBF) from baseline and area under the plasma concentration versus time curve after 16 weeks of therapy. Conclusion: Cilengitide is well tolerated to doses of 2,400 mg/m 2, durable complete and partial responses were seen in this phase I study, and clinical response appears related to rCBF changes.

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.2006.06.6514

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 290

Metadata

Authors
Nabors, L. B., Mikkelsen, T., Rosenfeld, S. S., Hochberg, F., Akella, N. S., Fisher, J. D., Cloud, G. A., Zhang, Y., Carson, K., Wittemer, S. M., Colevas, A. D., & Grossman, S. A.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2007-05-01
Volume
25
Issue
13
Pages
1651-1657
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2150456585
Cited by
290
References
1
FWCI
15.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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: Phase I and Correlative Biology Study of Cilengitide in Patients With Recurrent Malignant Glioma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2006.06.6514
The paper
Nabors, L. B., Mikkelsen, T., Rosenfeld, S. S., Hochberg, F., Akella, N. S., Fisher, J. D., Cloud, G. A., Zhang, Y., Carson, K., Wittemer, S. M., Colevas, A. D., & Grossman, S. A. (2007). Phase I and Correlative Biology Study of Cilengitide in Patients With Recurrent Malignant Glioma. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.06.6514

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.