Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 260

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Phase III Study of the Value of Thalidomide Added to Melphalan Plus Prednisone in Elderly Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: The HOVON 49 Study

Wijermans, Pierre, Schaafsma, Martijn, Termorshuizen, Fabian, Ammerlaan, Rianne, Wittebol, Shulamiet, Sinnige, Harm, Zweegman, Sonja, van Marwijk Kooy, Marinus, van der Griend, René, Lokhorst, Henk, Sonneveld, Pieter·2010·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: For several decades, the treatment of elderly patients with multiple myeloma (MM) has consisted of melphalan and prednisone (MP). The Dutch-Belgium Hemato-Oncology Cooperative Group (HOVON) investigated the efficacy of thalidomide added to MP (MP-T) in a randomized phase III trial. The objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy, toxicity, and effects on quality of life of MP-T. Patients and Methods: A randomized phase III trial compared standard MP with MP-T (thalidomide 200 mg/d) in newly diagnosed patients with multiple myeloma older than age 65 years. Maintenance therapy with thalidomide 50 mg/d was administered to patients after MP-T until relapse. The primary end point was event-free survival (EFS); response rate, overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) were secondary end points. Results: An intent-to-treat analysis of 333 evaluable patients showed significantly higher response rates in MP-T–treated patients compared with MP-treated patients a response (≥ partial response: 66% v 45%, respectively; P < .001; and ≥ very good partial response [VGPR]: 27% v 10%, respectively; P < .001). EFS was 13 months with MP-T versus 9 months with MP (P < .001). OS was 40 months with MP-T versus 31 months with MP (P = .05). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that thalidomide improves the response rate and VGPR in elderly patients with newly diagnosed MM. MP-T also results in a better EFS, PFS, and OS.

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.2009.26.1610

Cites

2 of 2 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 2 references

Cited by

See all 260

Metadata

Authors
Wijermans, P., Schaafsma, M., Termorshuizen, F., Ammerlaan, R., Wittebol, S., Sinnige, H., Zweegman, S., van Marwijk Kooy, M., van der Griend, R., Lokhorst, H., & Sonneveld, P.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2010-07-01
Volume
28
Issue
19
Pages
3160-3166
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2143860449
Cited by
260
References
2
FWCI
21.91
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: Phase III Study of the Value of Thalidomide Added to Melphalan Plus Prednisone in Elderly Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: The HOVON 49 Study. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2009.26.1610
The paper
Wijermans, P., Schaafsma, M., Termorshuizen, F., Ammerlaan, R., Wittebol, S., Sinnige, H., Zweegman, S., van Marwijk Kooy, M., van der Griend, R., Lokhorst, H., & Sonneveld, P. (2010). Phase III Study of the Value of Thalidomide Added to Melphalan Plus Prednisone in Elderly Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: The HOVON 49 Study. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.26.1610

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.