Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 650

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

Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab in Combination With Gemcitabine and Erlotinib in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer

Van Cutsem, Eric, Vervenne, Walter L., Bennouna, Jaafar, Humblet, Yves, Gill, Sharlene, Van Laethem, Jean-Luc, Verslype, Chris, Scheithauer, Werner, Shang, Aijing, Cosaert, Jan, Moore, Malcolm J.·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Treatment with gemcitabine provides modest benefits in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. The addition of erlotinib to gemcitabine shows a small but significant improvement in overall survival (OS) versus gemcitabine alone. Phase II results for bevacizumab plus gemcitabine provided the rationale for a phase III trial of gemcitabine-erlotinib plus bevacizumab or placebo. Patients and Methods: Patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m 2/week), erlotinib (100 mg/day), and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) or gemcitabine, erlotinib, and placebo in this double-blind, phase III trial. Primary end point was OS; secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), disease control rate, and safety. Results: A total of 301 patients were randomly assigned to the placebo group and 306 to the bevacizumab group. Median OS was 7.1 and 6.0 months in the bevacizumab and placebo arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.89; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.07; P = .2087); this difference was not statistically significant. Adding bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib significantly improved PFS (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.86; P = .0002). Treatment with bevacizumab plus gemcitabine-erlotinib was well tolerated: safety data did not differ from previously described safety profiles for individual drugs. Conclusion: The primary objective was not met. The addition of bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib did not lead to a statistically significant improvement in OS in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. PFS, however, was significantly longer in the bevacizumab group compared with placebo. No unexpected safety events were observed from adding bevacizumab to gemcitabine-erlotinib.

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.2008.20.0238

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 650

Metadata

Authors
Van Cutsem, E., Vervenne, W. L., Bennouna, J., Humblet, Y., Gill, S., Van Laethem, J.-L., Verslype, C., Scheithauer, W., Shang, A., Cosaert, J., & Moore, M. J.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-05-01
Volume
27
Issue
13
Pages
2231-2237
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2115898240
Cited by
650
References
3
FWCI
32.52
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 Bevacizumab in Combination With Gemcitabine and Erlotinib in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.20.0238
The paper
Van Cutsem, E., Vervenne, W. L., Bennouna, J., Humblet, Y., Gill, S., Van Laethem, J.-L., Verslype, C., Scheithauer, W., Shang, A., Cosaert, J., & Moore, M. J. (2009). Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab in Combination With Gemcitabine and Erlotinib in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.20.0238

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.