CCTG HN11: SPECT-CT guided elective contralateral neck treatment (SELECT) for patients with lateralized oropharyngeal cancer—A phase III randomized controlled trial.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
TPS6114 Background: Lymphatic mapping identifies neck lymph nodes at risk for cancer spread in patients with lateralized oropharyngeal (OPC) squamous cell carcinoma. We hypothesize that a lymphatic mapping guided approach to radiotherapy (RT) treatment of the contralateral neck will enable safe de-escalation of therapy with acceptable disease control with potential benefits in RT related toxicity, QOL, swallowing function and economics. Methods: HN.11 is a Canadian Cancer Trials Group international multi-centre, non-inferiority randomized phase III trial comparing a lymphatic mapping-guided approach for management of the contralateral neck (experimental) vs. bilateral neck radiation therapy (RT) (control). The primary objective is to determine if a lymphatic mapping-guided approach for management of the contralateral neck has a non-inferior disease-free survival (DFS) compared to bilateral neck RT. Secondary objectives: To compare swallowing related QOL, xerostomia, isolated contralateral neck failure, overall survival, loco-regional failure, distant metastases, RT-related toxicities, patient reported adverse events (PRO CTCAE), gastrostomy tube usage, and economics indicators (resource utilization, lost productivity, financial toxicity, EQ5D). Exploratory objectives: Swallowing function using video fluoroscopic swallow studies, head and neck-cancer specific QOL, patterns of lymphatic drainage, radiomic prediction of contralateral lymphatic drainage, correlation of tumour somatic mutations and ctDNA with disease recurrence. Statistical Design: The target sample size is 510 patients. The experimental arm will be considered non-inferior if the upper limit of the one sided 95% confidence interval (CI) of the estimated hazard ratio (HR) does not exceed 1.46 (non-inferiority margin of 6.5% for 2-year DFS). In the primary intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis, the study has 81% power, with a one-sided type I error rate of 5%, assuming 5 years of accrual, 3-years of follow up to observe 178 DFS events, and a 5% loss to follow up. If non-inferiority is demonstrated in the ITT analysis, a secondary per-protocol analysis will be performed, analyzing those patients treated as per their allocation, with 80% power to detect non-inferiority of the experimental arm assuming a conservative 10% cross-over from the experimental to the control arm (i.e. failed lymphatic mapping). Conduct to Date: Study activation September 29, 2022. First enrollment was February 10, 2023. Supported by Canadian Cancer Society, Canadian Institutes of Health Research, National Cancer Trials Network (NCTN). Clinical trial information: NCT05451004 .
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".