Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 256

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

Phase III Trial of Two Investigational Schedules of Ifosfamide Compared With Standard-Dose Doxorubicin in Advanced or Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study

Lorigan, Paul, Verweij, Jaap, Papai, Zsuzsa, Rodenhuis, Sjoerd, Le Cesne, Axel, Leahy, Michael G., Radford, John A., Van Glabbeke, Martine M., Kirkpatrick, Anne, Hogendoorn, Pancras C.W., Blay, Jean-Yves·2007·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Single-agent doxorubicin remains the standard treatment for advanced soft tissue sarcomas. Combining doxorubicin with standard-dose ifosfamide has not been shown to improve survival and is associated with a significantly increased toxicity; it is not known whether higher dose single-agent ifosfamide is superior to doxorubicin. Patients and Methods: This randomized prospective multicenter phase III trial was designed to compare progression-free survival of patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma receiving either regimen of standard doxorubicin 75 mg/m 2 every 21 days, ifosfamide 9 g/m 2 over 3 days continuous infusion, or ifosfamide 3 g/m 2 per day in 3 hours over 3 days. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response rate, and toxicity. Results: The study included 326 patients. Grade 4 leukopenia, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and encephalopathy were more frequent in the ifosfamide arms. Progression-free survival, overall survival, and response rates were not significantly different between the three arms. An independent data monitoring committee reviewed the interim data and recommended early closure of the trial for futility (ie, no significant difference would be shown). Conclusion: Single-agent doxorubicin remains the treatment of choice for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma.

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.2006.09.7717

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 256

Metadata

Authors
Lorigan, P., Verweij, J., Papai, Z., Rodenhuis, S., Le Cesne, A., Leahy, M. G., Radford, J. A., Van Glabbeke, M. M., Kirkpatrick, A., Hogendoorn, P. C. W., & Blay, J.-Y.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2007-07-20
Volume
25
Issue
21
Pages
3144-3150
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2160752563
Cited by
256
References
1
FWCI
9.89
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: Phase III Trial of Two Investigational Schedules of Ifosfamide Compared With Standard-Dose Doxorubicin in Advanced or Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2006.09.7717
The paper
Lorigan, P., Verweij, J., Papai, Z., Rodenhuis, S., Le Cesne, A., Leahy, M. G., Radford, J. A., Van Glabbeke, M. M., Kirkpatrick, A., Hogendoorn, P. C. W., & Blay, J.-Y. (2007). Phase III Trial of Two Investigational Schedules of Ifosfamide Compared With Standard-Dose Doxorubicin in Advanced or Metastatic Soft Tissue Sarcoma: A European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Soft Tissue and Bone Sarcoma Group Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2006.09.7717

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.