Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 42 of the 42 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Differential Crizotinib Response Duration Among ALK Fusion Variants in ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Yoshida, Tatsuya, Oya, Yuko, Tanaka, Kosuke, Shimizu, Junichi, Horio, Yoshitsugu, Kuroda, Hiroaki, Sakao, Yukinori, Hida, Toyoaki, Yatabe, Yasushi·2016·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) rearrangement–positive non–small-cell lung cancers can be effectively treated with an ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) such as crizotinib, but the response magnitude and duration are heterogeneous. Several ALK variants have been identified, but few studies have focused on the effects of different ALK variants on the efficacy of crizotinib. Patients and Methods: Among 55 patients treated with crizotinib as the initial ALK-TKI between January 2007 and December 2014, we identified 35 patients with tumor specimens that could be evaluated for ALK variants by reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction. We retrospectively evaluated the efficacy of crizotinib on the basis of the objective response rate and progression-free survival (PFS) according to the ALK variants. Results: The most frequent ALK variant was variant 1 in 19 patients (54%), followed by variant 2 in five patients (14%), variant 3a/3b in four patients (12%), and other variants in seven patients (20%). Objective response rate was 69% in all patients, whereas it was 74% and 63% in the variant 1 and non–variant 1 groups, respectively. The median PFS time was significantly longer in patients with variant 1 than in those with non–variant 1 (median PFS, 11.0 months [95% CI, 6.5 to 43.0 months] v 4.2 months [95% CI, 1.6 to 10.2 months], respectively; P < .05). Multivariable analysis identified two significant factors associated with PFS duration, ALK variant 1 (hazard ratio, 0.350; 95% CI, 0.128 to 0.929; P < .05) and advanced stage (hazard ratio, 4.646; 95% CI, 1.381 to 21.750; P < .05). Conclusion: Our results indicate the better efficacy of crizotinib in patients with ALK variant 1 versus non–variant 1. The ALK variant status might affect the efficacy of ALK-TKIs.

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.2015.65.8732

Cites

42 of 42 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 42 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Yoshida, T., Oya, Y., Tanaka, K., Shimizu, J., Horio, Y., Kuroda, H., Sakao, Y., Hida, T., & Yatabe, Y.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2016-10-01
Volume
34
Issue
28
Pages
3383-3389
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2471664064
Cited by
266
References
42
FWCI
29.93
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: Differential Crizotinib Response Duration Among ALK Fusion Variants in ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2015.65.8732
The paper
Yoshida, T., Oya, Y., Tanaka, K., Shimizu, J., Horio, Y., Kuroda, H., Sakao, Y., Hida, T., & Yatabe, Y. (2016). Differential Crizotinib Response Duration Among ALK Fusion Variants in ALK-Positive Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.65.8732

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.