The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Optimal Morphologic Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy: An Alternate Outcome End Point Before Resection of Hepatic Colorectal Metastases
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: The purposes of this study were to confirm the prognostic value of an optimal morphologic response to preoperative chemotherapy in patients undergoing chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab before resection of colorectal liver metastases (CLM) and to identify predictors of the optimal morphologic response. Patients and Methods: The study included 209 patients who underwent resection of CLM after preoperative chemotherapy with oxaliplatin- or irinotecan-based regimens with or without bevacizumab. Radiologic responses were classified as optimal or suboptimal according to the morphologic response criteria. Overall survival (OS) was determined, and prognostic factors associated with an optimal response were identified in multivariate analysis. Results: An optimal morphologic response was observed in 47% of patients treated with bevacizumab and 12% of patients treated without bevacizumab (P < .001). The 3- and 5-year OS rates were higher in the optimal response group (82% and 74%, respectively) compared with the suboptimal response group (60% and 45%, respectively; P < .001). On multivariate analysis, suboptimal morphologic response was an independent predictor of worse OS (hazard ratio, 2.09; P = .007). Receipt of bevacizumab (odds ratio, 6.71; P < .001) and largest metastasis before chemotherapy of ≤ 3 cm (odds ratio, 2.12; P = .025) were significantly associated with optimal morphologic response. The morphologic response showed no specific correlation with conventional size-based RECIST criteria, and it was superior to RECIST in predicting major pathologic response. Conclusion: Independent of preoperative chemotherapy regimen, optimal morphologic response is sufficiently correlated with OS to be considered a surrogate therapeutic end point for patients with CLM.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Saltz, L. B., Clarke, S., Díaz-Rubio, E., Scheithauer, W., Figer, A., Wong, R., Koski, S., Lichinitser, M., Yang, T.-S., Rivera, F., et al. (2008) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2007.14.9930 · Cited by 2,955
Cited by
Adam, R., de Gramont, A., Figueras, J., Kokudo, N., Kunstlinger, F., Loyer, E., Poston, G., Rougier, P., Rubbia-Brandt, L., Sobrero, A., et al. (2015) · Cancer Treatment Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2015.06.006 · Cited by 607
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Shindoh, J., Loyer, E. M., Kopetz, S., Boonsirikamchai, P., Maru, D. M., Chun, Y. S., Zimmitti, G., Curley, S. A., Charnsangavej, C., Aloia, T. A., & Vauthey, J.-N.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2012-12-20
- Volume
- 30
- Issue
- 36
- Pages
- 4566-4572
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2147634187
- Cited by
- 212
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 8.10
- 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: Optimal Morphologic Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy: An Alternate Outcome End Point Before Resection of Hepatic Colorectal Metastases. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2012.45.2854
- The paper
- Shindoh, J., Loyer, E. M., Kopetz, S., Boonsirikamchai, P., Maru, D. M., Chun, Y. S., Zimmitti, G., Curley, S. A., Charnsangavej, C., Aloia, T. A., & Vauthey, J.-N. (2012). Optimal Morphologic Response to Preoperative Chemotherapy: An Alternate Outcome End Point Before Resection of Hepatic Colorectal Metastases. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2012.45.2854
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.