Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 632

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine Plus Cetuximab Versus Gemcitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Southwest Oncology Group–Directed Intergroup Trial S0205

Open access
Philip, Philip A., Benedetti, Jacqueline, Corless, Christopher L., Wong, Ralph, O'Reilly, Eileen M., Flynn, Patrick J., Rowland, Kendrith M., Atkins, James N., Mirtsching, Barry C., Rivkin, Saul E., Khorana, Alok A., Goldman, Bryan, Fenoglio-Preiser, Cecilia M., Abbruzzese, James L., Blanke, Charles D.·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology
DOI 10.1200/jco.2009.25.7550
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Purpose: Patients with advanced pancreas cancer present with disease that is poorly responsive to conventional therapies. Preclinical and early clinical evidence has supported targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signaling pathway in patients with pancreas cancer. This trial was conducted to evaluate the contribution of an EGFR-targeted agent to standard gemcitabine therapy. Cetuximab is a monoclonal antibody against the ligand-binding domain of the receptor. Patients and Methods: Patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to receive gemcitabine alone or gemcitabine plus cetuximab. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, time to treatment failure, objective response, and toxicity. Results: A total of 745 eligible patients were accrued. No significant difference was seen between the two arms of the study with respect to the median survival time (6.3 months for the gemcitabine plus cetuximab arm v 5.9 months for the gemcitabine alone arm; hazard ratio = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.23; P = .23, one-sided). Objective responses and progression-free survival were similar in both arms of the study. Although time to treatment failure was longer in patients on gemcitabine plus cetuximab (P = .006), the difference in length of treatment was only 2 weeks longer in the combination arm. Among patients who were studied for tumoral EGFR expression, 90% were positive, with no treatment benefit detected in this patient subset. Conclusion: In patients with advanced pancreas cancer, the anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody cetuximab did not improve the outcome compared with patients treated with gemcitabine alone. Alternate targets other than EGFR should be evaluated for new drug development.

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.2009.25.7550

Cites

15 of 15 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 15 references

Cited by

See all 632

Metadata

Authors
Philip, P. A., Benedetti, J., Corless, C. L., Wong, R., O'Reilly, E. M., Flynn, P. J., Rowland, K. M., Atkins, J. N., Mirtsching, B. C., Rivkin, S. E., Khorana, A. A., Goldman, B., Fenoglio-Preiser, C. M., Abbruzzese, J. L., & Blanke, C. D.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Publisher
American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)
Published
2010-08-01
Volume
28
Issue
22
Pages
3605-3610
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
DOI
10.1200/jco.2009.25.7550
OpenAlex
W2144025124
Cited by
632
References
15
FWCI
26.50
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 Study Comparing Gemcitabine Plus Cetuximab Versus Gemcitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Southwest Oncology Group–Directed Intergroup Trial S0205. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.25.7550
The paper
Philip, P. A., Benedetti, J., Corless, C. L., Wong, R., O'Reilly, E. M., Flynn, P. J., Rowland, K. M., Atkins, J. N., Mirtsching, B. C., Rivkin, S. E., Khorana, A. A., Goldman, B., Fenoglio-Preiser, C. M., Abbruzzese, J. L., & Blanke, C. D. (2010). Phase III Study Comparing Gemcitabine Plus Cetuximab Versus Gemcitabine in Patients With Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Southwest Oncology Group–Directed Intergroup Trial S0205. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.25.7550

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.