The RADIO trial: Randomized assessment of cisplatin dosing interval for ototoxicity with curative concurrent chemo-radiation for locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
TPS12144 Background: Patients with locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (LASCCHN) receive curative chemoradiation (CRT) with Cisplatin, as a standard of care. A meta-analysis of 52 randomized trials comparing Low Dose (LD) and High Dose (HD) schedules demonstrated differing toxicity profiles but hearing effects were not rigorously studied. Hearing loss associated with HD Cisplatin can result in survivorship challenges. A local study suggested a protective effect for LD Cisplatin in relation to ototoxicity and pharmacogenomic markers, MATE1 and COMT, to be associated with risk for ototoxicity. We hypothesize that LD cisplatin is associated with reduced frequency of hearing loss when compared to the standard HD cisplatin in LASCCHN patients on CRT and that differences in MATE1/COMT can predict for cisplatin-related ototoxicity and be identified prior to treatment. Our goal is to develop an innovative personalized treatment pathway incorporating predictive pharmacogenomics markers to improve the tolerability and survivorship outcomes of curative CRT for LASCCHN. Methods: This is a prospective, open-label, randomized clinical trial. Following informed consent, eligible LASCCHN patients planned for primary CRT will be stratified by tumor p16 status and then randomized in 1:1 fashion to either concurrent LD Cisplatin (40mg/m2 every week) or HD cisplatin (100mg/m2 every 3 weeks). The primary outcome is to measure the change in incidence of CTCAE grade ≥2 hearing loss and hearing-related quality of life (QOL) at 1 year. As part of secondary and exploratory outcomes, differences in survival, loco-regional control, global QOL and other toxicities (e.g. nephrotoxicity, neurotoxicity) will be assessed. The relationship between MATE1 and COMT, as predictors for cisplatin-related ototoxicity will be evaluated. Cost-effectiveness analyses comparing the two regimens will be assessed. Statistical plan: Based on rates of CTCAE grade ≥2 hearing loss in an earlier study (Winquist et al., 2016), assuming a conservative rate of hearing loss, amongst treated patients, of 60% with HD cisplatin and 30% with LD cisplatin, a total sample size of 92 patients would achieve > 80% statistical power, (two-sided, alpha = 0.05 test of two proportions) to detect these differences. 100 patients would be targeted to accrual for an assumed 5% noncompliance rate. For hearing related QOL, a two-sided, alpha = 0.05, two-sample t-test with 50 patients per group would achieve > 80% statistical power to detect an effect size of 0.60 and > 95% power to detect an effect size of 0.75. All analyses will be based primarily on the intent-to-treat population. An arms-length data and safety monitoring committee (DSMC) will review safety data bi-annually. Trial accrual status: 60 participants have been accrued. Clinical trial information: NCT03649048.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».