Prospective Study Investigating the Efficacy and Safety of a Scalp Cooling Device for the Prevention of Alopecia in Women Undergoing (Neo)Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The prevention of chemotherapy-induced alopecia still represents an urgent need for every day clinical practice. In this regard, this prospective single-center study included breast cancer (BC) patients who underwent a scalp cooling device (Dignicap®) during (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy with the aim to evaluate the efficacy and safety of this device in preventing alopecia. One hundred and seventy-eight patients (median age 43 years) were enrolled. The chemotherapy regimen included anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy (68.1%), docetaxel and cyclophosphamide (25.8%), anthracycline and taxane-based plus carboplatin (3.9%), and paclitaxel alone (2.2%). In 25.3% of cases, a dose dense schedule was used. Overall, the success rate was 68.0%: 100% in paclitaxel alone, 87.0% in docetaxel-cyclophosphamide, 59.5% in anthracycline and taxane, and 71.4% in the sequential regimen plus carboplatin group (anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy versus taxane-based chemotherapy, p ≤ 001. No difference in terms of hair preservation between dose-dense or standard schedule was found (p = 0.557). Early discontinuation of the scalp cooling was observed in 50 patients (28.1%). Although 138 patients (77.5%) experienced adverse events, 70.2% of patients were satisfied with this device. In conclusion, this large prospective study confirmed the helpful effect of the scalp cooling system in preventing alopecia in BC patients also undergoing sequential anthracyclines and taxane-based chemotherapy.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".