Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 382

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 23 of the 23 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phase III Study of Gefitinib Compared With Intravenous Methotrexate for Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck

Stewart, J. Simon W., Cohen, Ezra E.W., Licitra, Lisa, Van Herpen, Carla M.L., Khorprasert, Chonlakiet, Soulieres, Denis, Vodvarka, Pavel, Rischin, Danny, Garin, Avgust M., Hirsch, Fred R., Varella-Garcia, Marileila, Ghiorghiu, Serban, Hargreaves, Laura, Armour, Alison, Speake, Georgina, Swaisland, Alan, Vokes, Everett E.·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: To compare survival in patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) treated with gefitinib 250 or 500 mg/day or standard methotrexate. Patients and Methods: Four hundred eighty-six patients with recurrent SCCHN were randomly assigned to oral gefitinib 250 mg/day, gefitinib 500 mg/day, or methotrexate 40 mg/m 2 intravenously weekly. Primary end point was overall survival, secondary end points were objective response rate (ORR), safety, symptom improvement, and quality of life (QOL). Exploratory end points included association of efficacy with epidermal growth factor receptor gene copy number and other biomarkers. Results: Neither gefitinib 250 nor 500 mg/day improved overall survival compared with methotrexate (hazard ratio [HR], 1.22; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.57; P = .12; and HR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.87 to 1.43; P = .39, respectively). In the gefitinib 250 mg/day, 500 mg/day, and methotrexate groups, respectively, median overall survival was 5.6, 6.0, and 6.7 months; ORRs (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) were 2.7%, 7.6% and 3.9%, with no statistically significant difference between either gefitinib arm and methotrexate. No unexpected adverse events were observed, except for tumor hemorrhage-type events with gefitinib (8.9%, gefitinib 250 mg/day; 11.4%, gefitinib 500 mg/day; 1.9%, methotrexate). QOL improvement rates (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Head & Neck total score) were 13.4%, 18.0%, and 6.0% for gefitinib 250 mg/day, 500 mg/day, and methotrexate, respectively. Conclusion: In patients with recurrent or metastatic SCCHN, while responses with gefitinib were seen, neither gefitinib 250 nor 500 mg/day improved overall survival compared with methotrexate. With the exception of tumor hemorrhage–type events with gefitinib, the adverse event profiles were generally consistent with those previously observed.

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.2008.17.0530

Cites

23 of 23 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 23 references

Cited by

See all 382

Metadata

Authors
Stewart, J. S. W., Cohen, E. E. W., Licitra, L., Van Herpen, C. M. L., Khorprasert, C., Soulieres, D., Vodvarka, P., Rischin, D., Garin, A. M., Hirsch, F. R., Varella-Garcia, M., Ghiorghiu, S., Hargreaves, L., Armour, A., Speake, G., Swaisland, A., & Vokes, E. E.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-04-10
Volume
27
Issue
11
Pages
1864-1871
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2160286086
Cited by
382
References
23
FWCI
33.35
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 Study of Gefitinib Compared With Intravenous Methotrexate for Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.17.0530
The paper
Stewart, J. S. W., Cohen, E. E. W., Licitra, L., Van Herpen, C. M. L., Khorprasert, C., Soulieres, D., Vodvarka, P., Rischin, D., Garin, A. M., Hirsch, F. R., Varella-Garcia, M., Ghiorghiu, S., Hargreaves, L., Armour, A., Speake, G., Swaisland, A., & Vokes, E. E. (2009). Phase III Study of Gefitinib Compared With Intravenous Methotrexate for Recurrent Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.17.0530

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.