Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 693

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phase III Trial of Four Cisplatin-Containing Doublet Combinations in Stage IVB, Recurrent, or Persistent Cervical Carcinoma: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

Open access
Monk, Bradley J., Sill, Michael W., McMeekin, D. Scott, Cohn, David E., Ramondetta, Lois M., Boardman, Cecelia H., Benda, Jo, Cella, David·2009·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Assess toxicity and efficacy of cisplatin (Cis) doublet combinations in advanced and recurrent cervical carcinoma. Patients and Methods: Patients were randomly assigned to paclitaxel 135 mg/m 2 over 24 hours plus Cis 50 mg/m 2 day 2 every 3 weeks (PC, reference arm); vinorelbine 30 mg/m 2 days 1 and 8 plus Cis 50 mg/m 2 day 1 every 3 weeks (VC); gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m 2 day 1 and 8 plus Cis 50 mg/m 2 day 1 every 3 weeks (GC); or topotecan 0.75 mg/m 2 days 1, 2, and 3 plus Cis 50 mg/m 2 day 1 every 3 weeks (TC). Survival was the primary end point with a 33% improvement relative to PC considered important (85% power, alpha = 5%). Quality-of-life data were prospectively collected. Results: A total of 513 patients were enrolled when a planned interim analysis recommended early closure for futility. The experimental-to-PC hazard ratios of death were 1.15 (95% CI, 0.79 to 1.67) for VC, 1.32 (95% CI, 0.91 to 1.92) for GC, and 1.26 (95% CI, 0.86 to 1.82) for TC. The hazard ratios for progression-free survival (PFS) were 1.36 (95% CI, 0.97 to 1.90) for VC, 1.39 (95% CI, 0.99 to 1.96) for GC, and 1.27 (95% CI, 0.90 to 1.78) for TC. Response rates (RRs) for PC, VC, GC, and TC were 29.1%, 25.9%, 22.3%, and 23.4%, respectively. The arms were comparable with respect to toxicity except for leucopenia, neutropenia, infection, and alopecia. Conclusion: VC, GC, and TC are not superior to PC in terms of overall survival (OS). However, the trend in RR, PFS, and OS favors PC. Differences in chemotherapy scheduling, pre-existing morbidity, and toxicity are important in individualizing therapy.

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.2009.21.8909

Cites

4 of 4 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 4 references

Cited by

See all 693

Metadata

Authors
Monk, B. J., Sill, M. W., McMeekin, D. S., Cohn, D. E., Ramondetta, L. M., Boardman, C. H., Benda, J., & Cella, D.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2009-10-01
Volume
27
Issue
28
Pages
4649-4655
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2118508302
Cited by
693
References
4
FWCI
34.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

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 Four Cisplatin-Containing Doublet Combinations in Stage IVB, Recurrent, or Persistent Cervical Carcinoma: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.21.8909
The paper
Monk, B. J., Sill, M. W., McMeekin, D. S., Cohn, D. E., Ramondetta, L. M., Boardman, C. H., Benda, J., & Cella, D. (2009). Phase III Trial of Four Cisplatin-Containing Doublet Combinations in Stage IVB, Recurrent, or Persistent Cervical Carcinoma: A Gynecologic Oncology Group Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.21.8909

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.