Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 705

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

Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer “Unfit” for Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy

Galsky, Matthew D., Hahn, Noah M., Rosenberg, Jonathan, Sonpavde, Guru, Hutson, Thomas, Oh, William K., Dreicer, Robert, Vogelzang, Nicholas, Sternberg, Cora N., Bajorin, Dean F., Bellmunt, Joaquim·2011·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Cisplatin-based combination chemotherapy is considered standard first-line treatment for patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. However, a large proportion of patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma are considered “unfit” for cisplatin. The purpose of this review is to define unfit patients and to identify treatment options for this subgroup of patients. Patients and Methods: In this review, the criteria used to define unfit patients are explored and the results of prospective clinical trials evaluating chemotherapeutic regimens in unfit patients are summarized. Results: Several phase II trials and a single, large phase III trial have explored chemotherapeutic regimens for the treatment of unfit patients with metastatic urothelial carcinoma. Heterogeneous eligibility criteria have been used to define unfit patients in these studies. A uniform definition of unfit is proposed on the basis of the results of a survey of genitourinary medical oncologists. According to this definition, unfit patients would meet at least one of the following criteria: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 2, creatinine clearance less than 60 mL/min, grade ≥ 2 hearing loss, grade ≥ 2 neuropathy, and/or New York Heart Association Class III heart failure. Conclusion: Additional studies to optimize treatment for this important subset of patients are needed. A uniform definition of unfit patients will lead to more uniform clinical trials, enhanced ability to interpret the results of these trials, and a greater likelihood of developing a viable strategy for regulatory approval.

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.2011.34.8433

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 705

Metadata

Authors
Galsky, M. D., Hahn, N. M., Rosenberg, J., Sonpavde, G., Hutson, T., Oh, W. K., Dreicer, R., Vogelzang, N., Sternberg, C. N., Bajorin, D. F., & Bellmunt, J.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2011-06-10
Volume
29
Issue
17
Pages
2432-2438
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2152762320
Cited by
705
References
3
FWCI
18.38
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: Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer “Unfit” for Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2011.34.8433
The paper
Galsky, M. D., Hahn, N. M., Rosenberg, J., Sonpavde, G., Hutson, T., Oh, W. K., Dreicer, R., Vogelzang, N., Sternberg, C. N., Bajorin, D. F., & Bellmunt, J. (2011). Treatment of Patients With Metastatic Urothelial Cancer “Unfit” for Cisplatin-Based Chemotherapy. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.34.8433

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.