Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 510

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

HALO 202: Randomized Phase II Study of PEGPH20 Plus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine Versus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine in Patients With Untreated, Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma

Hingorani, Sunil R., Zheng, Lei, Bullock, Andrea J., Seery, Tara E., Harris, William P., Sigal, Darren S., Braiteh, Fadi, Ritch, Paul S., Zalupski, Mark M., Bahary, Nathan, Oberstein, Paul E., Wang-Gillam, Andrea, Wu, Wilson, Chondros, Dimitrios, Jiang, Ping, Khelifa, Sihem, Pu, Jie, Aldrich, Carrie, Hendifar, Andrew E.·2018·Journal of Clinical Oncology

Abstract

Purpose: Metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma is characterized by excessive hyaluronan (HA) accumulation in the tumor microenvironment, elevating interstitial pressure and impairing perfusion. Preclinical studies demonstrated pegvorhyaluronidase alfa (PEGPH20) degrades HA, thereby increasing drug delivery. Patients and Methods: Patients with previously untreated metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned to treatment with PEGPH20 plus nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (PAG) or nab-paclitaxel/gemcitabine (AG). Tumor HA levels were measured retrospectively using a novel affinity histochemistry assay. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS; overall) and thromboembolic (TE) event rate. Secondary end points included overall survival, PFS by HA level, and objective response rate. An early imbalance in TE events in the PAG arm led to a clinical hold; thereafter, patients with TE events were excluded and enoxaparin prophylaxis was initiated. Results: A total of 279 patients were randomly assigned; 246 had HA data; 231 were evaluable for efficacy; 84 (34%) had HA-high tumors (ie, extracellular matrix HA staining ≥ 50% of tumor surface at any intensity). PFS was significantly improved with PAG treatment overall (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73; 95% CI, 0.53 to 1.00; P = .049) and for patients with HA-high tumors (HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.26 to 1.00; P = .048). In patients with HA-high tumors (PAG v AG), the objective response rate was 45% versus 31%, and median overall survival was 11.5 versus 8.5 months (HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.61). The most common treatment-related grade 3/4 adverse events with significant differences between arms (PAG v AG) included muscle spasms (13% v 1%), neutropenia (29% v 18%), and myalgia (5% v 0%). TE events were comparable after enoxaparin initiation (14% PAG v 10% AG). Conclusion: This study met its primary end points of PFS and TE event rate. The largest improvement in PFS was observed in patients with HA-high tumors who received PAG. A similar TE event rate was observed between the treatment groups in stage 2 of the trial.

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.2017.74.9564

Cites

6 of 6 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 6 references

Research works printed but not linked: 15

  1. 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-0155 · DOI · Paper page
  2. 10.3748/wjg.v20.i32.11142 · DOI
  3. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-1051 · DOI · Paper page
  4. 10.1093/carcin/bgu115 · DOI
  5. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-10-0470 · DOI · Paper page
  6. 10.1158/1535-7163.MCT-14-0580 · DOI
  7. 10.1016/j.ccr.2014.06.004 · DOI
  8. 10.3389/fonc.2015.00192 · DOI
  9. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2010 · DOI · Paper page
  10. 10.6004/jnccn.2013.0163 · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2013.0163
  11. 10.1111/jth.12725 · DOI
  12. 10.1200/JCO.2009.23.1811 · DOI
  13. 10.1634/theoncologist.2013-0226 · DOI · Paper page
  14. 10.1016/j.ejca.2011.10.017 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1007/s11239-015-1313-4 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

See all 510

Metadata

Authors
Hingorani, S. R., Zheng, L., Bullock, A. J., Seery, T. E., Harris, W. P., Sigal, D. S., Braiteh, F., Ritch, P. S., Zalupski, M. M., Bahary, N., Oberstein, P. E., Wang-Gillam, A., Wu, W., Chondros, D., Jiang, P., Khelifa, S., Pu, J., Aldrich, C., & Hendifar, A. E.
Venue
Journal of Clinical Oncology
Published
2018-02-01
Volume
36
Issue
4
Pages
359-366
ISSN
  • 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
  • 1527-7755
OpenAlex
W2772923107
Cited by
510
References
6
FWCI
20.25
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: HALO 202: Randomized Phase II Study of PEGPH20 Plus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine Versus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine in Patients With Untreated, Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2017.74.9564
The paper
Hingorani, S. R., Zheng, L., Bullock, A. J., Seery, T. E., Harris, W. P., Sigal, D. S., Braiteh, F., Ritch, P. S., Zalupski, M. M., Bahary, N., Oberstein, P. E., Wang-Gillam, A., Wu, W., Chondros, D., Jiang, P., Khelifa, S., Pu, J., Aldrich, C., & Hendifar, A. E. (2018). HALO 202: Randomized Phase II Study of PEGPH20 Plus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine Versus Nab-Paclitaxel/Gemcitabine in Patients With Untreated, Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2017.74.9564

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.