Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 438

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

Phase III, Randomized Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin Versus Gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) Compared With Gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoma E6201: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

Open access
Poplin, Elizabeth, Feng, Yang, Berlin, Jordan, Rothenberg, Mace L., Hochster, Howard, Mitchell, Edith, Alberts, Steven, O'Dwyer, Peter, Haller, Daniel, Catalano, Paul, Cella, David, Benson, Al Bowen·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Single-agent gemcitabine (GEM) is standard treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Fixed-dose rate (FDR) GEM and GEM plus oxaliplatin have shown promise in early clinical trials. E6201 was designed to compare overall survival (OS) of standard weekly GEM 1,000 mg/m 2/30 minutes versus GEM FDR 1,500 mg/m 2/150 minutes or GEM 1,000 mg/m 2/100 minutes/day 1 plus oxaliplatin 100 mg/m 2/day 2 every 14 days (GEMOX). Methods: This trial included patients with metastatic or locally advanced pancreatic cancer, normal organ function, and performance status of 0 to 2. The study was designed to detect a 33% difference in median survival (hazard ratio [HR] ≤ 0.75 for either of the experimental arms) with 81% power while maintaining a significance level of 2.5% in a two-sided test for each of the two primary comparisons. Results: Eight hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled. The median survival and 1-year survival were 4.9 months (95% CI, 4.5 to 5.6) and 16% for GEM, 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.4 to 6.9), and 21% for GEM FDR (HR, 0.83; stratified log-rank P = .04), and 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.9 to 6.5) and 21% for GEMOX (HR, 0.88; stratified log-rank P = .22). Neither of these differences met the prespecified criteria for significance. Survival was 9.2 months for patients with locally advanced disease, and 5.4 months for those with metastatic disease. Grade 3/4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were greatest with GEM FDR. GEMOX caused higher rates of nausea, vomiting, and neuropathy. Conclusion: Neither GEM FDR nor GEMOX resulted in substantially improved survival or symptom benefit over standard GEM in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer.

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.2008.20.9007

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 438

Metadata

Authors
Poplin, E., Feng, Y., Berlin, J., Rothenberg, M. L., Hochster, H., Mitchell, E., Alberts, S., O'Dwyer, P., Haller, D., Catalano, P., Cella, D., & Benson, A. B.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-08-10
Volume
27
Issue
23
Pages
3778-3785
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2014366767
Cited by
438
References
3
FWCI
21.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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, Randomized Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin Versus Gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) Compared With Gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoma E6201: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.20.9007
The paper
Poplin, E., Feng, Y., Berlin, J., Rothenberg, M. L., Hochster, H., Mitchell, E., Alberts, S., O'Dwyer, P., Haller, D., Catalano, P., Cella, D., & Benson, A. B. (2009). Phase III, Randomized Study of Gemcitabine and Oxaliplatin Versus Gemcitabine (fixed-dose rate infusion) Compared With Gemcitabine (30-minute infusion) in Patients With Pancreatic Carcinoma E6201: A Trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.20.9007

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.