Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 476

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Preoperative Radiotherapy With Chemoradiotherapy in Nonresectable Rectal Cancer

Brændengen, Morten, Tveit, Kjell M., Berglund, Åke, Birkemeyer, Elke, Frykholm, Gunilla, Påhlman, Lars, Wiig, Johan N., Byström, Per, Bujko, Krzysztof, Glimelius, Bengt·2008·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Preoperative chemoradiotherapy is considered standard treatment for locally advanced rectal cancer, although the scientific evidence for the chemotherapy addition is limited. This trial investigated whether chemotherapy as part of a multidisciplinary treatment approach would improve downstaging, survival, and relapse rate. Patients and Methods: The randomized study included 207 patients with locally nonresectable T4 primary rectal carcinoma or local recurrence from rectal carcinoma in the period 1996 to 2003. The patients received either chemotherapy (fluorouracil/leucovorin) administered concurrently with radiotherapy (50 Gy) and adjuvant for 16 weeks after surgery (CRT group, n = 98) or radiotherapy alone (50 Gy; RT group, n = 109). Results: The two groups were well balanced according to pretreatment characteristics. An R0 resection was performed in 82 patients (84%) in the CRT group and in 74 patients (68%) in the RT group (P = .009). Pathologic complete response was seen in 16% and 7%, respectively. After an R0 + R1 resection, local recurrence was found in 5% and 7%, and distant metastases in 26% and 39%, respectively. Local control (82% v 67% at 5 years; log-rank P = .03), time to treatment failure (63% v 44%; P = .003), cancer-specific survival (72% v 55%; P = .02), and overall survival (66% v 53%; P = .09) all favored the CRT group. Grade 3 or 4 toxicity, mainly GI, was seen in 28 (29%) of 98 and six (6%) of 109, respectively (P = .001). There was no difference in late toxicity. Conclusion: CRT improved local control, time to treatment failure, and cancer-specific survival compared with RT alone in patients with nonresectable rectal cancer. The treatments were well tolerated.

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.2007.15.3858

Cites

3 of 3 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 3 references

Cited by

See all 476

Metadata

Authors
Brændengen, M., Tveit, K. M., Berglund, Å., Birkemeyer, E., Frykholm, G., Påhlman, L., Wiig, J. N., Byström, P., Bujko, K., & Glimelius, B.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2008-08-01
Volume
26
Issue
22
Pages
3687-3694
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2171573992
Cited by
476
References
3
FWCI
14.78
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 Study Comparing Preoperative Radiotherapy With Chemoradiotherapy in Nonresectable Rectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2007.15.3858
The paper
Brændengen, M., Tveit, K. M., Berglund, Å., Birkemeyer, E., Frykholm, G., Påhlman, L., Wiig, J. N., Byström, P., Bujko, K., & Glimelius, B. (2008). Randomized Phase III Study Comparing Preoperative Radiotherapy With Chemoradiotherapy in Nonresectable Rectal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2007.15.3858

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.