Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 304

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 16 of the 16 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Lapatinib Plus Capecitabine in Women with HER-2–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: Final Survival Analysis of a Phase III Randomized Trial

Open access
Cameron, David, Casey, Michelle, Oliva, Cristina, Newstat, Beth, Imwalle, Bradley, Geyer, Charles E.·2010·The Oncologist

Abstract

Objectives.: A planned interim analysis of study EGF100151 prompted early termination of enrollment based on a longer time to progression with lapatinib and capecitabine than with capecitabine alone in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)-2+ previously treated advanced breast cancer or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Here, we report final analyses of overall survival. Patients and Methods.: Women with HER-2+ MBC who progressed after regimens that included, but were not limited to, anthracyclines, taxanes, and trastuzumab, were randomized to lapatinib (1,250 mg/day) plus capecitabine (2,000 mg/m2) or capecitabine monotherapy (2,500 mg/m2) on days 1–14 of a 21-day cycle. Results.: At enrollment termination, 399 patients were randomized, and nine were being screened and were offered combination treatment. In total, 207 and 201 patients were enrolled to combination therapy and monotherapy, respectively. Thirty-six patients receiving monotherapy crossed over to combination therapy following enrollment termination. The median overall survival times were 75.0 weeks for the combination arm and 64.7 weeks for the monotherapy arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.87; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71–1.08; p = .210). A Cox regression analysis considering crossover as a time-dependent covariate suggested a 20% lower risk for death for patients treated with combination therapy (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64–0.99; p = .043). The low incidence of serious adverse events was consistent with previously reported rates. Conclusions.: Although premature enrollment termination and subsequent crossover resulted in insufficient power to detect differences in overall survival, exploratory analyses demonstrate a trend toward a survival advantage with lapatinib plus capecitabine. These data continue to support the efficacy of lapatinib in patients with HER-2+ MBC.

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 · 10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0181

Cites

16 of 16 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 16 references

Cited by

See all 304

Metadata

Authors
Cameron, D., Casey, M., Oliva, C., Newstat, B., Imwalle, B., & Geyer, C. E.
Venue
The Oncologist
Published
2010-08-24
Volume
15
Issue
9
Pages
924-934
ISSN
  • 1083-7159 (ISSN-L)
  • 1549-490X
OpenAlex
W2148479421
Cited by
304
References
16
FWCI
9.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

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: Lapatinib Plus Capecitabine in Women with HER-2–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: Final Survival Analysis of a Phase III Randomized Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0181
The paper
Cameron, D., Casey, M., Oliva, C., Newstat, B., Imwalle, B., & Geyer, C. E. (2010). Lapatinib Plus Capecitabine in Women with HER-2–Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: Final Survival Analysis of a Phase III Randomized Trial. The Oncologist. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2009-0181

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.