The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Phase III Trial Comparing Intraperitoneal and Intravenous Paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Cisplatin Plus S-1 in Patients With Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis: PHOENIX-GC Trial
Abstract
Purpose: Intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy demonstrated promising clinical effects in patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis. We aimed to verify its superiority over standard systemic chemotherapy in overall survival. Patients and Methods: This randomized phase III trial enrolled patients with gastric cancer with peritoneal metastasis who had received no or short-term (< 2 months) chemotherapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive intraperitoneal and intravenous paclitaxel plus S-1 (IP; intraperitoneal paclitaxel 20 mg/m 2 and intravenous paclitaxel 50 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8 plus S-1 80 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 14 for a 3-week cycle) or S-1 plus cisplatin (SP; S-1 80 mg/m 2 per day on days 1 to 21 plus cisplatin 60 mg/m 2 on day 8 for a 5-week cycle), stratified by center, previous chemotherapy, and extent of peritoneal metastasis. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were response rate, 3-year overall survival rate, and safety. Results: We enrolled 183 patients and performed efficacy analyses in 164 eligible patients. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the arms, except that patients in the IP arm had significantly more ascites. The median survival times for the IP and SP arms were 17.7 and 15.2 months, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.49 to 1.04; stratified log-rank P = .080). In the sensitivity analysis adjusted for baseline ascites, the hazard ratio was 0.59 (95% CI, 0.39 to 0.87; P = .008). The 3-year overall survival rate was 21.9% (95% CI, 14.9% to 29.9%) in the IP arm and 6.0% (95% CI, 1.6% to 14.9%) in the SP arm. Both regimens were well tolerated. Conclusion: This trial failed to show statistical superiority of intraperitoneal paclitaxel plus systemic chemotherapy. However, the exploratory analyses suggested possible clinical benefits of intraperitoneal paclitaxel for gastric cancer.
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 response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1)
Eisenhauer, E. A., Therasse, P., Bogaerts, J., Schwartz, L. H., Sargent, D., Ford, R., Dancey, J., Arbuck, S., Gwyther, S., Mooney, M., et al. (2009) · European Journal of Cancer · doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026 · Cited by 29,534
Bang, Y.-J., Van Cutsem, E., Feyereislova, A., Chung, H. C., Shen, L., Sawaki, A., Lordick, F., Ohtsu, A., Omuro, Y., Satoh, T., et al. (2010) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(10)61121-x · Cited by 7,302
Intraperitoneal Cisplatin and Paclitaxel in Ovarian Cancer
Armstrong, D. K., Bundy, B., Wenzel, L., Huang, H. Q., Baergen, R., Lele, S., Copeland, L. J., Walker, J. L., & Burger, R. A. (2006) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa052985 · Cited by 2,625
Wilke, H., Muro, K., Van Cutsem, E., Oh, S.-C., Bodoky, G., Shimada, Y., Hironaka, S., Sugimoto, N., Lipatov, O., Kim, T.-Y., et al. (2014) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(14)70420-6 · Cited by 2,438
Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4)
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association (2017) · Gastric Cancer · doi:10.1007/s10120-016-0622-4 · Cited by 2,429
Capecitabine and Oxaliplatin for Advanced Esophagogastric Cancer
Cunningham, D., Starling, N., Rao, S., Iveson, T., Nicolson, M., Coxon, F., Middleton, G., Daniel, F., Oates, J., & Norman, A. R. (2008) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa073149 · Cited by 2,285
Koizumi, W., Narahara, H., Hara, T., Takagane, A., Akiya, T., Takagi, M., Miyashita, K., Nishizaki, T., Kobayashi, O., Takiyama, W., et al. (2008) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(08)70035-4 · Cited by 1,847
Clinical research methodologies in diagnosis and staging of patients with peritoneal carcinomatosis
Jacquet, P., & Sugarbaker, P. H. (1996) · Cancer Treatment and Research · doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-1247-5_23 · Cited by 1,708
Gastric cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up
Smyth, E. C., Verheij, M., Allum, W., Cunningham, D., Cervantes, A., & Arnold, D. (2016) · Annals of Oncology · doi:10.1093/annonc/mdw350 · Cited by 1,555
Gastric Cancer, Version 3.2016, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology
Ajani, J. A., D'Amico, T. A., Almhanna, K., Bentrem, D. J., Chao, J., Das, P., Denlinger, C. S., Fanta, P., Farjah, F., Fuchs, C. S., et al. (2016) · Journal of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network · doi:10.6004/jnccn.2016.0137 · Cited by 930
Cited by
Wang, F., Zhang, X., Li, Y., Tang, L., Qu, X., Ying, J., Zhang, J., Sun, L., Lin, R., Qiu, H., et al. (2021) · Cancer Communications · doi:10.1002/cac2.12193 · Cited by 624
Primary and metastatic peritoneal surface malignancies
Cortés-Guiral, D., Hübner, M., Alyami, M., Bhatt, A., Ceelen, W., Glehen, O., Lordick, F., Ramsay, R., Sgarbura, O., Van Der Speeten, K., et al. (2021) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-021-00326-6 · Cited by 308
Metadata
- Authors
- Ishigami, H., Fujiwara, Y., Fukushima, R., Nashimoto, A., Yabusaki, H., Imano, M., Imamoto, H., Kodera, Y., Uenosono, Y., Amagai, K., Kadowaki, S., Miwa, H., Yamaguchi, H., Yamaguchi, T., Miyaji, T., & Kitayama, J.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 2018-07-01
- Volume
- 36
- Issue
- 19
- Pages
- 1922-1929
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W2801279586
- Cited by
- 353
- References
- 15
- FWCI
- 31.34
- 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: Phase III Trial Comparing Intraperitoneal and Intravenous Paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Cisplatin Plus S-1 in Patients With Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis: PHOENIX-GC Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.2018.77.8613
- The paper
- Ishigami, H., Fujiwara, Y., Fukushima, R., Nashimoto, A., Yabusaki, H., Imano, M., Imamoto, H., Kodera, Y., Uenosono, Y., Amagai, K., Kadowaki, S., Miwa, H., Yamaguchi, H., Yamaguchi, T., Miyaji, T., & Kitayama, J. (2018). Phase III Trial Comparing Intraperitoneal and Intravenous Paclitaxel Plus S-1 Versus Cisplatin Plus S-1 in Patients With Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis: PHOENIX-GC Trial. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2018.77.8613
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.
