Breast CancerHAI-5NCT04098926
Highly Accelerated Dose-Integrated Radiotherapy in 5 Fractions in Breast Cancer
A study testing Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer in people with Breast Cancer and Radiotherapy, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy. Improved local control leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 70 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Cancer, Radiotherapy
- What is being tested?
- Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 70 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- Jan 2015to 13 Jul 2018
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 70 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Older adult
Who may be able to join
- ≥ 70 years old
- AND breast conserving surgery or mastectomy for breast carcinoma
- AND multidisciplinary decision of adjuvant irradiation
- AND absence of distant metastases
- AND informed consent obtained, signed and dated before specific protocol procedures
Who cannot join
- Bilateral breast irradiation
- In case of mastectomy: positive resection margin, needing boost
- Mental condition rendering the patient unable to understand the nature, scope and possible consequences of the study
- Patient unlikely to comply with the protocol; i.e. uncooperative attitude, inability to return for follow-up visits, and unlikely to complete the study
- History of previous radiation treatment to the same region
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of Dose Integrated Accelerated Irradiation in Older Women (≥ 70 Year) With Early and Loco-regionally Advanced Stages of Breast Cancer
Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy. Improved local control leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often omitted. Following reasons are invoked:
Read more
- frailty of the patient
- fear for toxicity
- impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
- dependency for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
- negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)
Hypofractionation is feasible without increased toxicity, and combines better local control with patient comfort and lower costs. Further lowering the number of fractions (from 15-21 to 5) will further improve patient comfort, but is challenging when different doses are needed in the same target volume. This problem is addressed using advanced techniques permitting dose-integration.
In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected by CGA . Some problems do interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to support patients and to develop an inventory of radiotherapy obstacles.
Our study includes breast cancer patients, ≥70 years old, referred for adjuvant radiotherapy after surgical treatment. A schedule of 5 fractions is offered, encompassing different targets of treatment.
Read the detailed description
Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control and overall survival, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy (EBCTCG, Lancet, 2011). Improved local control, leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often perceived as too cumbersome. As a consequence, patients who could have benefit from breast conserving therapy are referred for mastectomy. Even when breast-conserving surgery is chosen, adjuvant radiotherapy is sometimes omitted in frail patients over 70 years fearing the burden of daily transportation to the radiation department. However, omitting radiotherapy results in a higher risk of loco-regional recurrence. It has been shown that older patients have a worse prognosis due to suboptimal treatment, especially in locally advanced breast cancer (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Following reasons are invoked by the patients or the care-givers:
- frailty of the patient
- fear for (mostly acute) toxicity
- impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
- dependency on third parties (family, services) for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
- negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)
Hypofractionation and acceleration are proven to be feasible in recent trials (cf. Start Trial, Fast Trial).
Based on these data and in order to overcome above mentioned obstacles for radiotherapy in breast cancer, we start a study with accelerated radiotherapy in women above 70 years old.
As we are experienced in advanced techniques as IMRT, VMAT, simultaneous dose-integration and IGRT, we will use simultaneous dose integrated protocols to permit inclusion of early as well as locally advanced breast cancer.
Integration of doses within one global volume encompasses several advantages:
- number of fractions can be maintained, regardless of the indication
- imprevisible high doses due to overlap of adjacent fields in tangential techniques is avoided
- high dose volume is more adequately limited to the actual region of high risk, as dose difference is smaller.
In order to evaluate the impact of accelerated radiotherapy on the well being of the patient and on the treatment cost, quality of life (QoL) will be measured and a cost-analysis will be performed.
Methodology of research At the radiotherapy intake consultation, patients with age ≥70 years are extensively informed on the advantages and the possible risks of accelerated irradiation. A written documentation of the study is provided to permit consultation of family and general practitioner before consent for participation. Until 1 week before the start of radiotherapy, patients can decide wether or not to participate in this study without impact on the starting day. Inclusion is performed after signing the informed consent.
The aim is to include 70 patients aged ≥ 70 years, who, after signing the informed consent, will be treated with the accelerated schemes over 10 days (5 sessions, every other day). Following doses are prescribed
- Breast: 5x5,7Gy
- R0 boost: 5x6.5Gy
- R1 boost: 5x6.9Gy
- Thoracic wall: 5x5.7Gy
- Lymph nodes: 5x5.4Gy --> these doses are simultaneously integrated, and regions are prescribed according to our standard protocol .
Positioning of the patient depends on technical possibilities and patient rigidity:
- for breast irradiation without lymph nodes, prone positioning is preferred if feasible, if not the patient is positioned in supine
- for thoracic irradiation with or without lymph node irradiation, patient is always installed in supine position
- for breast + lymph node irradiation, patients are installed in supine position.
End points of our study are acute and chronic toxicity, loco-regional control and QoL.
The study is divided in two different strata (first group without lymph node irradiation, second group with lymph node irradiation) for following reasons:
- these groups represent different outcomes with lymph node invasion having a negative impact on morbidity, loco-regional control and overall survival
- a higher frequency of acute moist desquamation might occur in the second group (lymph nodes included) as compared to the first group, due to a larger target volume.
- the brachial plexus is a special concern, as it lies close or even within the target volume. Therefore we will monitor closely the effects on the brachial plexus for the second group. Nevertheless, as the total dose is lower than with normo-fractionation, the risk for brachial neuropathy is maximally reduced.
Groups
- 40 patients in group 1: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost without lymph node irradiation
- 30 patients in group 2: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost and with lymph node region irradiation
An application for funding to perform geriatric assessment is introduced. In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected bij CGA . Some of these problems even interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to develop an inventory of obstacles for undergoing radiotherapy.
When screening scores positive (G8 score ≤ 14/17) geriatric assessment will be performed to evaluate the problems and needs of the patient. Patients will be referred for appropriate treatment and support. As described by Schönberg, treatment in early stage breast cancer might even lead to improved morbidity and mortality when compared to a non-cancer population, due to the 'healthy user' effect, detecting otherwise unrevealed problems. In the scope of this study, this effect can not be evaluated.
Power analysis To estimate the number of patients needed, we applied the Wilson score confidence interval test for binomial proportion, which is a 2-sided exact method for power analysis, using "SAS Power and Sample Size".
Group 1:
To achieve a conditional probability of 87% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 35 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 40 patients in this study-arm.
Group 2 To achieve a conditional probability of >95% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 25 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 30 patients in this study-arm.
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer, Radiotherapy
- Being tested
- Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer, Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer
- Keywords
- Older women, Accelerated radiotherapy, Dose-integrated radiotherapy
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancerRadiation
WBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy
Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancerRadiation
WBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy Lymph node region: 5 x 5.4Gy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN0 | Experimental | Lymph node negative breast cancer Receives: Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer |
| Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN1 | Experimental | Lymph node positive breast cancer Receives: Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Breast retraction (LENTSOMA)
Breast Cancer Conservative treatment.core (BCCT.core) objective measurement
Measured: 6 weeks post-radiotherapy
Secondary outcomes (16)
Acute toxicity: number of patients with clinical relevant dermatitis (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Assessment of grade of dermatitis
Measured: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with moist desquamation (CTCAE v. 4.0 (grade 3)
Measured: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with pain (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Grade 1: mild; Grade 2: moderate, limiting activity of daily living (ADL); grade 3: severe, limiting ADL
Measured: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with pruritus (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Grade 1: mild, localized topical intervention; Grade 2: intense, oral intervention, skin changes
Measured: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with fatigue (MFI-20)
Questionnaire (20 questions)
Measured: 1-8 weeks
Chronic toxicity: measurement of patient satisfaction with breast esthetic outcome: BREAST-Q questionnaire
BREAST-Q questionnaire: Patient reported outcome, evaluating satisfaction with esthetic outcome.
Measured: Before radiotherapy and after 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fibrosis
LENT Soma: fibrosis (score 0-3)
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of pain
LENT Soma: score 0-4
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of telangiectasia
LENT Soma: Score 0-3
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of lymphedema
LENT Soma: score 0-4
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fatigue (MFI-20)
Questionnaire (20 questions)
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity - prevalence of radiation induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) (standardized screening questionnaire), confirmed by electromyogram (EMG)
If a screening reveals unilateral pain, loss of function or muscular atrophy in the ipsilateral arm, an EMG will be performed to confirm/exclude RIBP
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Loco-regional tumor control
Ipsilateral or regional breast recurrence
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Distant tumor control
Distant metastases free survival
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Breast cancer specific survival
Number of patients alive and without breast cancer recurrence at 2 and 5 years after adjuvant radiotherapy
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Overall survival
Number of patients alive, 2 and 5 years after adjuvant radiotherapy
Measured: 2 and 5 years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Sep 2019
- Study startJan 2015
- Primary completionJul 2018
- Study completion13 Jul 2018
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Breast CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, GhentThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Ghent
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04098926
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EC/2014/1167
- Acronym
- HAI-5
- Status last verified
- Jun 2015
- First submitted
- 2 Jun 2015
- Last updated
- 23 Sep 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 23 Sep 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of Dose Integrated Accelerated Irradiation in Older Women (≥ 70 Year) With Early and Loco-regionally Advanced Stages of Breast Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04098926
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- HAI-5 / EC/2014/1167
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer, Radiotherapy
- Keywords
- Older women, Accelerated radiotherapy, Dose-integrated radiotherapy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 70 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, GhentUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Jan 2015
- Primary completion
- Jul 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 13 Jul 2018 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Sep 2019 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy. Improved local control leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often omitted. Following reasons are invoked:
- frailty of the patient
- fear for toxicity
- impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
- dependency for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
- negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)
Hypofractionation is feasible without increased toxicity, and combines better local control with patient comfort and lower costs. Further lowering the number of fractions (from 15-21 to 5) will further improve patient comfort, but is challenging when different doses are needed in the same target volume. This problem is addressed using advanced techniques permitting dose-integration.
In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected by CGA . Some problems do interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to support patients and to develop an inventory of radiotherapy obstacles.
Our study includes breast cancer patients, ≥70 years old, referred for adjuvant radiotherapy after surgical treatment. A schedule of 5 fractions is offered, encompassing different targets of treatment.
Detailed description
Adjuvant radiotherapy in breast cancer improves local control and overall survival, also in the elderly. Hormonal therapy in hormone sensitive tumors improves results but can not substitute radiotherapy (EBCTCG, Lancet, 2011). Improved local control, leads to less breast cancer related morbidity and mortality, also in an older population (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Unfortunately, in older patients with lower life expectancy, adjuvant radiotherapy is often perceived as too cumbersome. As a consequence, patients who could have benefit from breast conserving therapy are referred for mastectomy. Even when breast-conserving surgery is chosen, adjuvant radiotherapy is sometimes omitted in frail patients over 70 years fearing the burden of daily transportation to the radiation department. However, omitting radiotherapy results in a higher risk of loco-regional recurrence. It has been shown that older patients have a worse prognosis due to suboptimal treatment, especially in locally advanced breast cancer (Schonberg, JCO, 2011).
Following reasons are invoked by the patients or the care-givers:
- frailty of the patient
- fear for (mostly acute) toxicity
- impaired mobility, rendering transportation and positioning more difficult
- dependency on third parties (family, services) for transportation to and from the radiotherapy departement
- negative cost effectiveness ratio, due to high cost (especially for complex techniques and long schedules) and lower benefit (lower life expectancy)
Hypofractionation and acceleration are proven to be feasible in recent trials (cf. Start Trial, Fast Trial).
Based on these data and in order to overcome above mentioned obstacles for radiotherapy in breast cancer, we start a study with accelerated radiotherapy in women above 70 years old.
As we are experienced in advanced techniques as IMRT, VMAT, simultaneous dose-integration and IGRT, we will use simultaneous dose integrated protocols to permit inclusion of early as well as locally advanced breast cancer.
Integration of doses within one global volume encompasses several advantages:
- number of fractions can be maintained, regardless of the indication
- imprevisible high doses due to overlap of adjacent fields in tangential techniques is avoided
- high dose volume is more adequately limited to the actual region of high risk, as dose difference is smaller.
In order to evaluate the impact of accelerated radiotherapy on the well being of the patient and on the treatment cost, quality of life (QoL) will be measured and a cost-analysis will be performed.
Methodology of research At the radiotherapy intake consultation, patients with age ≥70 years are extensively informed on the advantages and the possible risks of accelerated irradiation. A written documentation of the study is provided to permit consultation of family and general practitioner before consent for participation. Until 1 week before the start of radiotherapy, patients can decide wether or not to participate in this study without impact on the starting day. Inclusion is performed after signing the informed consent.
The aim is to include 70 patients aged ≥ 70 years, who, after signing the informed consent, will be treated with the accelerated schemes over 10 days (5 sessions, every other day). Following doses are prescribed
- Breast: 5x5,7Gy
- R0 boost: 5x6.5Gy
- R1 boost: 5x6.9Gy
- Thoracic wall: 5x5.7Gy
- Lymph nodes: 5x5.4Gy --> these doses are simultaneously integrated, and regions are prescribed according to our standard protocol .
Positioning of the patient depends on technical possibilities and patient rigidity:
- for breast irradiation without lymph nodes, prone positioning is preferred if feasible, if not the patient is positioned in supine
- for thoracic irradiation with or without lymph node irradiation, patient is always installed in supine position
- for breast + lymph node irradiation, patients are installed in supine position.
End points of our study are acute and chronic toxicity, loco-regional control and QoL.
The study is divided in two different strata (first group without lymph node irradiation, second group with lymph node irradiation) for following reasons:
- these groups represent different outcomes with lymph node invasion having a negative impact on morbidity, loco-regional control and overall survival
- a higher frequency of acute moist desquamation might occur in the second group (lymph nodes included) as compared to the first group, due to a larger target volume.
- the brachial plexus is a special concern, as it lies close or even within the target volume. Therefore we will monitor closely the effects on the brachial plexus for the second group. Nevertheless, as the total dose is lower than with normo-fractionation, the risk for brachial neuropathy is maximally reduced.
Groups
- 40 patients in group 1: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost without lymph node irradiation
- 30 patients in group 2: irradiation of breast/thoracic wall with or without integrated boost and with lymph node region irradiation
An application for funding to perform geriatric assessment is introduced. In the elder with cancer, several unrecognized geriatric problems, including depression and cognitive impairment, can be detected bij CGA . Some of these problems even interact with cancer treatment. In this study screening and assessment is provided to develop an inventory of obstacles for undergoing radiotherapy.
When screening scores positive (G8 score ≤ 14/17) geriatric assessment will be performed to evaluate the problems and needs of the patient. Patients will be referred for appropriate treatment and support. As described by Schönberg, treatment in early stage breast cancer might even lead to improved morbidity and mortality when compared to a non-cancer population, due to the 'healthy user' effect, detecting otherwise unrevealed problems. In the scope of this study, this effect can not be evaluated.
Power analysis To estimate the number of patients needed, we applied the Wilson score confidence interval test for binomial proportion, which is a 2-sided exact method for power analysis, using "SAS Power and Sample Size".
Group 1:
To achieve a conditional probability of 87% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 35 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 40 patients in this study-arm.
Group 2 To achieve a conditional probability of >95% with an alpha-error of 0,1, a number of 25 patients would be needed. To compensate for drop-outs, we include 30 patients in this study-arm.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN0 | Experimental | Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancerLymph node negative breast cancer |
| Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN1 | Experimental | Radiation: Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancerLymph node positive breast cancer |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 70 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (5 listed)
- ≥ 70 years old
- AND breast conserving surgery or mastectomy for breast carcinoma
- AND multidisciplinary decision of adjuvant irradiation
- AND absence of distant metastases
- AND informed consent obtained, signed and dated before specific protocol procedures
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Bilateral breast irradiation
- In case of mastectomy: positive resection margin, needing boost
- Mental condition rendering the patient unable to understand the nature, scope and possible consequences of the study
- Patient unlikely to comply with the protocol; i.e. uncooperative attitude, inability to return for follow-up visits, and unlikely to complete the study
- History of previous radiation treatment to the same region
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancerWBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy | Radiation | Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN0 |
| Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancerWBI: 5 x 5.7Gy Thoracic wall: 5 x 5.7Gy R0 boost: 5 x 6.5Gy R1 boost: 5 x 6.9Gy Lymph node region: 5 x 5.4Gy | Radiation | Accelerated dose-integrated radiotherapy - pN1 |
Primary outcome
Breast retraction (LENTSOMA)
Time frame: 6 weeks post-radiotherapy
Breast Cancer Conservative treatment.core (BCCT.core) objective measurement
16 secondary outcomes
Acute toxicity: number of patients with clinical relevant dermatitis (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Time frame: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with moist desquamation (CTCAE v. 4.0 (grade 3)
Time frame: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with pain (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Time frame: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with pruritus (CTCAE v. 4.0)
Time frame: 1-8 weeks
Acute toxicity: number of patients with fatigue (MFI-20)
Time frame: 1-8 weeks
Chronic toxicity: measurement of patient satisfaction with breast esthetic outcome: BREAST-Q questionnaire
Time frame: Before radiotherapy and after 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fibrosis
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of pain
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of telangiectasia
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of lymphedema
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity: prevalence of fatigue (MFI-20)
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Chronic toxicity - prevalence of radiation induced brachial plexopathy (RIBP) (standardized screening questionnaire), confirmed by electromyogram (EMG)
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Loco-regional tumor control
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Distant tumor control
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Breast cancer specific survival
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Overall survival
Time frame: 2 and 5 years
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 23 Sep 2019.
Related trials for Breast Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingPhase 2
Gene Signatures to Guide HR+MBC Therapy in a Diverse Cohort
Invasive Mammary Carcinoma, Metastatic Breast Cancer
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparison of Reliability, Time Cost, and Participant Comfort of Lymphedema Assessments in Upper Extremity
Lymphedema, Upper Extremity Lymphedema
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Camrelizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Combination With or Without Famitinib as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Participants With Triple Negative Breast Cancer (BCTOP-T-N01)
TNBC - Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Whether Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib is as Effective as Chemotherapy Followed by Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib for the Treatment of High Anatomic Stage Breast Cancer With Low Recurrence Risk, The RxFINE-Low Trial
Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN0 breast cancer and Dose-integrated accelerated EBRT in pN+ breast cancer in people with Breast Cancer and Radiotherapy, run by University Hospital, Ghent at 1 site in Belgium.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 5 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 23 Sep 2019. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Belgium. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Breast retraction (LENTSOMA) (time frame: 6 weeks post-radiotherapy). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 23 Sep 2019.