Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 478

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab (STEPP), a Phase II, Open-Label, Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of a Pre-Emptive Skin Treatment Regimen on Skin Toxicities and Quality of Life in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

Lacouture, Mario E., Mitchell, Edith P., Piperdi, Bilal, Pillai, Madhavan V., Shearer, Heather, Iannotti, Nicholas, Xu, Feng, Yassine, Mohamed·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Panitumumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), is approved in the United States and Europe for the treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Skin toxicities are the most common adverse events with EGFR inhibitors. This is the first study designed to examine differences between pre-emptive and reactive skin treatment for specific skin toxicities in patients with mCRC for any EGFR inhibitor. Patients and Methods: Patients receiving panitumumab-containing therapy were randomly assigned 1:1 to pre-emptive or reactive treatment (after skin toxicity developed). Pre-emptive treatment included use of skin moisturizers, sunscreen, topical steroid, and doxycycline. The primary end point of the study was the incidence of protocol-specified ≥ grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period. Quality of life (QOL) was assessed with the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI). Results: Of 95 enrolled patients, 48 received pre-emptive treatment, and 47 received reactive treatment. The incidence of protocol-specified ≥ grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period was 29% and 62% for the pre-emptive and reactive groups, respectively. Mean DLQI score change from baseline to week 3 was 1.3 points and 4.2 points in the pre-emptive and reactive groups, respectively. Conclusion: The pre-emptive skin treatment regimen was well tolerated. The incidence of specific ≥ grade 2 skin toxicities during the 6-week skin treatment period was reduced by more than 50% in the pre-emptive group compared with the reactive group. Patients in the pre-emptive group reported less QOL impairment than patients in the reactive group.

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.2008.21.7828

Cites

26 of 26 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 26 references

Cited by

See all 478

Metadata

Authors
Lacouture, M. E., Mitchell, E. P., Piperdi, B., Pillai, M. V., Shearer, H., Iannotti, N., Xu, F., & Yassine, M.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2010-03-10
Volume
28
Issue
8
Pages
1351-1357
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2160344439
Cited by
478
References
26
FWCI
48.51
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: Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab (STEPP), a Phase II, Open-Label, Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of a Pre-Emptive Skin Treatment Regimen on Skin Toxicities and Quality of Life in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2008.21.7828
The paper
Lacouture, M. E., Mitchell, E. P., Piperdi, B., Pillai, M. V., Shearer, H., Iannotti, N., Xu, F., & Yassine, M. (2010). Skin Toxicity Evaluation Protocol With Panitumumab (STEPP), a Phase II, Open-Label, Randomized Trial Evaluating the Impact of a Pre-Emptive Skin Treatment Regimen on Skin Toxicities and Quality of Life in Patients With Metastatic Colorectal Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2008.21.7828

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.