The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phase III Open-Label Randomized Study of Eribulin Mesylate Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an Anthracycline and a Taxane
Open accessAbstract
Purpose: This phase III randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00337103) compared eribulin with capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods: Women with MBC who had received prior anthracycline- and taxane-based therapy were randomly assigned to receive eribulin or capecitabine as their first-, second-, or third-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic disease. Stratification factors were human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status and geographic region. Coprimary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Median OS times for eribulin (n = 554) and capecitabine (n = 548) were 15.9 and 14.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.00; P = .056). Median PFS times for eribulin and capecitabine were 4.1 and 4.2 months, respectively (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.25; P = .30). Objective response rates were 11.0% for eribulin and 11.5% for capecitabine. Global health status and overall quality-of-life scores over time were similar in the treatment arms. Both treatments had manageable safety profiles consistent with their known adverse effects; most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Conclusion: In this phase III study, eribulin was not shown to be superior to capecitabine with regard to OS or PFS.
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
New Guidelines to Evaluate the Response to Treatment in Solid Tumors
Therasse, P., Arbuck, S. G., Eisenhauer, E. A., Wanders, J., Kaplan, R. S., Rubinstein, L., Verweij, J., Van Glabbeke, M., van Oosterom, A. T., Christian, M. C., et al. (2000) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/92.3.205 · Cited by 15,660
Trastuzumab emtansine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer
Verma, S., Miles, D., Gianni, L., Krop, I. E., Welslau, M., Baselga, J., Pegram, M., Oh, D.-Y., Diéras, V., Guardino, E., et al. (2012) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1209124 · Cited by 3,834
Discrete sequential boundaries for clinical trials
GORDON LAN, K. K., & DEMETS, D. L. (1983) · Biometrika · doi:10.1093/biomet/70.3.659 · Cited by 2,310
Cited by
ESO-ESMO 2nd international consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC2)
Cardoso, F., Costa, A., Norton, L., Senkus, E., Aapro, M., André, F., Barrios, C. H., Bergh, J., Biganzoli, L., Blackwell, K. L., et al. (2014) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdu385 · Cited by 540
Metadata
- Authors
- Kaufman, P. A., Awada, A., Twelves, C., Yelle, L., Perez, E. A., Velikova, G., Olivo, M. S., He, Y., Dutcus, C. E., & Cortes, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2015-02-20
- Volume
- 33
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 594-601
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2137545466
- Cited by
- 463
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 21.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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 Open-Label Randomized Study of Eribulin Mesylate Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an Anthracycline and a Taxane. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2013.52.4892
- The paper
- Kaufman, P. A., Awada, A., Twelves, C., Yelle, L., Perez, E. A., Velikova, G., Olivo, M. S., He, Y., Dutcus, C. E., & Cortes, J. (2015). Phase III Open-Label Randomized Study of Eribulin Mesylate Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an Anthracycline and a Taxane. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.52.4892
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.