Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 216

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

Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study of Sequential Erlotinib and Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Mok, Tony S.K., Wu, Yi-Long, Yu, Chong-Jen, Zhou, Caicun, Chen, Yuh-Min, Zhang, Li, Ignacio, Jorge, Liao, Meilin, Srimuninnimit, Vichien, Boyer, Michael J., Chua-Tan, Marina, Sriuranpong, Virote, Sudoyo, Aru W., Jin, Kate, Johnston, Michael, Chui, Winsome, Lee, Jin-Soo·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: This study investigated whether sequential administration of erlotinib and chemotherapy improves clinical outcomes versus chemotherapy alone in unselected, chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients and Methods: Previously untreated patients (n = 154) with stage IIIB or IV NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned to receive erlotinib (150 mg/d) or placebo on days 15 to 28 of a 4-week cycle that included gemcitabine (1,250 mg/m 2 days 1 and 8) and either cisplatin (75 mg/m 2 day 1) or carboplatin (5 × area under the serum concentration-time curve, day 1). The primary end point was nonprogression rate (NPR) at 8 weeks. Secondary end points included tumor response rate, NPR at 16 weeks, duration of response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Results: The NPR at 8 weeks was 80.3% in the gemcitabine plus cisplatin or carboplatin (GC) -erlotinib arm (n = 76) and 76.9% in the GC-placebo arm (n = 78). At 16 weeks, the NPR was 64.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 53.8% for GC-placebo. The response rate was 35.5% for GC-erlotinib versus 24.4% for GC-placebo. PFS was significantly longer with GC-erlotinib than with GC-placebo (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.47; log-rank P = .0002; median, 29.4 v 23.4 weeks); this benefit was consistent across all clinical subgroups. There was no significant difference in OS. The addition of erlotinib to chemotherapy was well tolerated, with no increase in hematologic toxicity, and no treatment-related interstitial lung disease. Conclusion: Sequential administration of erlotinib following gemcitabine/platinum chemotherapy led to a significant improvement in PFS. This treatment approach warrants further investigation in a phase III study.

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.2008.21.5541

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 216

Metadata

Authors
Mok, T. S. K., Wu, Y.-L., Yu, C.-J., Zhou, C., Chen, Y.-M., Zhang, L., Ignacio, J., Liao, M., Srimuninnimit, V., Boyer, M. J., Chua-Tan, M., Sriuranpong, V., Sudoyo, A. W., Jin, K., Johnston, M., Chui, W., & Lee, J.-S.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-10-20
Volume
27
Issue
30
Pages
5080-5087
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2116827288
Cited by
216
References
3
FWCI
17.53
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, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study of Sequential Erlotinib and Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.21.5541
The paper
Mok, T. S. K., Wu, Y.-L., Yu, C.-J., Zhou, C., Chen, Y.-M., Zhang, L., Ignacio, J., Liao, M., Srimuninnimit, V., Boyer, M. J., Chua-Tan, M., Sriuranpong, V., Sudoyo, A. W., Jin, K., Johnston, M., Chui, W., & Lee, J.-S. (2009). Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase II Study of Sequential Erlotinib and Chemotherapy As First-Line Treatment for Advanced Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.21.5541

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.