The largest database of trusted experimental protocols

Chemoradiotherapy

Chemoradiotherapy: The combined use of chemotherapy and radiotherapy for the treatment of cancer.
This approach aims to enhance the efficacy of both modalities by exploiting their different mechanisms of action and potentially synergistic effects.
Chemoradiotherapy regimens vary widely in terms of the specific chemotherapeutic agents, radiation doses, and schedules employed, and are tailored to the type and stage of the cancer being treated.
The goal of chemoradiotherapy is to improve patient outcomes, such as increasing tumor response rates, prolonging survival, and reducing the risk of local recurrence.
Reseachers and clinicians must carefully optimize chemoradiotherapy protocols to maximize therapeutic benfits while minimizing toxicity.
Expereince the future of chemoradiotherapy optimization with PubCompare.ai, an AI-driven platform that effortlessly identifies the best protocols from literature, preprints, and patents.

Most cited protocols related to «Chemoradiotherapy»

The development of the consensus statement was underpinned by a five-year research project funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research [14] (link). The project used a mixed methods approach incorporating both empirical work and ethical analysis. The empirical work included interviews with key informants, review of published CRTs [15] (link), a survey of trialists, and a survey of REC chairs. Based on the empirical work, as well as the practical experiences of research team members, the team identified six questions specific to CRTs in need of further analysis: How should research participants be identified? From whom, how, and when must informed consent be obtained? Does clinical equipoise apply? How does one determine if the benefits outweigh the risks? Who are gatekeepers, and what are their responsibilities? How ought vulnerable groups be protected [16] (link)? The research team conducted an ethical analysis of each issue, which led to a series of discussion papers laying out principles, policy options, and rationales for proposed ethics guidelines [17] (link)–[20] (link). The research team posted these papers on a wiki (http://crtethics.wikispaces.com) and publicized the wiki in the discussion papers and surveys.
To develop the consensus statement from this process, the research team organized a two-and-a-half-day meeting of a multidisciplinary expert panel that took place in Ottawa, Canada, in November 2011. The research team identified the constituencies and perspectives that needed to be represented within the expert panel, including ethicists, cluster trialists, consumer representatives, RECs, policy makers, funding agencies, and journal editors. Potential expert panel members were identified by consultation with colleagues, via searches of the relevant literature and the Internet, and from respondents in the key informant interviews, trialist survey, and REC chair survey. In addition to six of the members of the research team, 26 external individuals were approached, of whom 13 agreed to participate. (See Text S2 for a list of the 19-member expert panel.) External members were invited as individuals rather than as representatives of their home organizations.
The research team made the discussion papers available to the expert panel in advance of the meeting. The first day of the consensus process was an open meeting with a simultaneous webcast, attended by individuals from the same constituencies and sources used to identify the expert panel. Eighty people participated in person, and a further 20 participated by webcast. The research team presented the results of the empirical studies and the ethical analyses of the six questions, and three expert discussants and the audience commented on the presentations. The open meeting served to further familiarize the expert panel with the content of the materials developed by the research team, and allowed them to hear issues raised about the materials by the broader audience. Video of the open portion of the consensus meeting is available via YouTube (http://www.youtube.com/user/mtaljaard55).
Over the next one and a half days the members of the expert panel met in closed session to discuss the identified issues and to develop recommendations. The expert panel was chaired by Professor Martin Eccles, an experienced small group leader with expertise in chairing guideline development groups. Initial discussions established the “rules of engagement” for the expert panel process. The expert panel agreed about how debate should be conducted and how they wanted the chair to run the process. The expert panel agreed to achieve consensus, where possible, through discussion and would document disagreements; they did not wish to use a majority voting system. Draft recommendations based upon the background papers were presented to the expert panel, and members were asked to identify issues in need of clarification and discussion. Full discussion of these issues was facilitated by the chair with the aim of achieving consensus on the underlying principles, but not necessarily specific wording. All expert panel members actively participated in the discussion. Some draft recommendations were substantially revised during the process. There were no substantive disagreements requiring presentation of dissenting views.
A writing group, consisting of seven members of the research team, then reviewed the results of the meeting and produced a first draft of the consensus statement. The writing group circulated the draft to the expert panel in December 2011 and asked for comments on both the principles and specific wording of the recommendations. Responses were received from all participants, and a point-by-point response to all comments (available on request) was produced and the draft consensus statement revised accordingly. In February 2012, the writing group posted the revised consensus statement on the wiki and invited the expert panel, participants of the open meeting, respondents in the key informant interviews, trialist survey, and REC chair survey, and other contacts of the research team to comment. Again, the writing group produced a point-by-point response to all comments (available on request) and revised the consensus statement. In June 2012, the final draft of the consensus statement was sent to the expert panel for approval, which was given by all members with no dissention.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2012
Chemoradiotherapy Equipoise Ethicists Hearing Policy Makers
The target sample size in qualitative research is achieved when data saturation occurs, that is when no new themes are identified with respect to a particular question of interest in successive interviews. Twenty-five potential informants were approached to participate in the study. Four individuals declined to participate. The interview from one informant was discarded as the recording was of insufficient quality for transcription and analysis. After analyzing 20 transcribed interviews, data saturation with respect to responses around the issue of informed consent in CRTs had been achieved.
The final sample included 20 experienced CRT researchers. There were 10 participants based in Europe, six based in the USA, and four based in Canada. Five respondents self-identified as statisticians, while the remainder described themselves as researchers. Eleven respondents were in the primary care field, six in hospital-based care or health services, and three in public health. All participants had been co-investigators on between two and twenty CRTs.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2013
Chemoradiotherapy Primary Health Care Transcription, Genetic

Protocol full text hidden due to copyright restrictions

Open the protocol to access the free full text link

Publication 2009
ARID1A protein, human Blood Vessel Chemoradiotherapy Dissection Ethics Committees, Research Neoplasms Operative Surgical Procedures Pathologists Patients Peritoneum Radiosurgery Surgeons Surgical Margins
From September 1994 to December 2005, 1,557 GC patients underwent curative gastrectomy at Samsung Medical Center. Among those, 1,107 patients were selected based on following criteria: histologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the stomach; surgical resection of tumour without macroscopic or microscopic residual disease; age ≥18; pathology stage IB (T2bN0, T1N1 but not T2aN0) to IV, according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system (6th Ed); complete surgical record and treatment record, and patients receiving the INT-0116 regimen as adjuvant treatment [7] (link). The study was approved by the institutional review board of the Samsung Medical Center, Seoul, South Korea (IRB approval number: SMC 2010-10-025). All study participants provided written informed consent form recommended by the IRB. In the patients who have deceased at the time of study entry, written informed consent forms were waived by the IRB. Study design and patient cohorts are provided according to REMARK guideline (Figure 1A, 1B, File S1, Section 1). Of the cohort of 1,107 patients, a discovery set of 520 patients and a validation set of 587 patients were randomly assigned and allocated to 6 batches stratified by tumor size and year of surgery for WG-DASL assay.
To avoid false-positive conclusions due to over-fitting, prognostic algorithms and their predefined cut-points were tested in independent cohorts that were not used for prognostic gene discovery and algorithm building. A 4-phase study was designed, with 4 pre-defined independent cohorts recruited from the Samsung Medical Center. The first 3 cohorts include patients with similar clinical and pathological features from chemoradiotherapy-treated study cohorts (File S1, Section 2). The first phase (discovery phase) of the study included GC patients from all clinical stages who were treated with chemo-radiotherapy (N = 520) [8] (link). Tumor blocks from these patients were subjected to prognostic gene discovery using the WG-DASL (Illumina, San Diego, CA), a microarray gene expression profiling method for FFPE [7] (link). An ad-hoc external validation of the gene set was performed to minimize any bias from single institutional cohort. The second phase (algorithm development) was to translate findings from the first phase into a clinically applicable test format. We chose the nCounter platform (Nanostring Technologies, Seattle, WA), because of its ability to interrogate the expression levels of up to 800 genes using total RNA extracted from FFPE in a single-tube reaction [8] (link). We screened stage II patients from the first phase (N = 186) for de novo discovery of prognostic genes, selected ideal combinations of genes using the gradient least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) algorithm [10] (link), and then built a first-generation GCPS (GCPS-g1) by adding the products of normalized gene expression and coefficients from the Cox model for DFS. In the third cohort of stage II patients (N = 216). In the fourth phase (testing of clinical utility in a surgery-only setting), we tested the potential clinical utility of GCPS in stage II patients treated with surgery only. A time stamp protocol (Figure S12) was developed before processing of this final cohort. We subsequently developed a refined second-generation GCPS (GCPS-g2) (the final gene set) by analyzing the combined stage II cohorts from the second and third phases of the study.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2014
Adenocarcinoma Biological Assay Candidate Gene Identification Cardiac Arrest Chemoradiotherapy Gastrectomy Genes Greig cephalopolysyndactyly syndrome Joints Microscopy Neoplasms Operative Surgical Procedures Patients Pharmaceutical Adjuvants Proteins Radiotherapy Residual Tumor Stomach Treatment Protocols

Protocol full text hidden due to copyright restrictions

Open the protocol to access the free full text link

Publication 2011
Base of Skull Bevacizumab Chemoradiotherapy Cisplatin Fluorouracil Maxillary Sinus Nasal Cavity Nasopharynx Neck Necrosis Nodes, Lymph Pharmaceutical Adjuvants Pharyngeal Space, Lateral Pterygopalatine Fossa Radiotherapy Radiotherapy, Intensity-Modulated Scan, CT PET Sphenoid Sinus Therapeutics Veins

Most recents protocols related to «Chemoradiotherapy»

Example 1

The effect of Tu on the electrochemical behavior of a chalcopyrite electrode was studied in a conventional 3-electrode glass-jacketed cell. A CuFeS2 electrode was using as working electrode, a saturated calomel electrode (SCE) was used as reference, and a graphite bar was used as counter-electrode. The CuFeS2 electrode was polished using 600 and 1200 grit carbide paper. All experiments were conducted at 25° C. using a controlled temperature water bath. The electrolyte composition was 500 mM H2SO4, 20 mM Fe2SO4 and 0-100 mM Tu. Before starting any measurement, solutions were bubbled with N2 for 30 minutes to reduce the concentration of dissolved 02. Open circuit potential (OCP) was recorded until changes of no more than 0.1 mV/min were observed. After a steady OCP value was observed, electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) was conducted at OCP using a 5 mV a.c. sinusoidal perturbation from 10 kHz to 10 mHz. Linear polarization resistance (LPR) tests were also conducted using a scan rate of 0.05 mV/s at ±15 mV from OCP.

Linear potential scans were conducted at electrode potentials ±15 mV from the OCP measured at each Tu concentration. All scans showed a linear behavior within the electrode potential range analyzed. An increase in the slope of the experimental plots was observed with increasing Tu concentration. The slope of these curves was used to estimate the value of the polarization resistance (Ret) at each concentration. These values were then used to estimate the values of the dissolution current density using equation 1:

i dissol RT nFR ct Eq . ( 1 )

FIG. 3 shows the effect of Tu on the dissolution current density and mixed potential of the CuFeS2 electrode, and indicates that a maximum dissolution current density was achieved when Tu concentration is 30 mM. Increasing Tu concentration to 100 mM resulted in a decrease in the current density and mixed potential of the CuFeS2 electrode. Moreover, after immersing the CuFeS2 electrode in the 100 mM Tu solution, a copper-like film was observed on the surface of the electrode, which film could only be removed by polishing the electrode with carbide paper.

FIG. 4 is a bar graph showing the effect of initial Tu or FDS concentration on the electrochemical dissolution of a chalcopyrite electrode in sulfuric acid solution at pH 2 and 25° C. A concentration of 10 mM Tu in the leach solution resulted in a six fold increase in dissolution rate compared to no Tu, and a concentration of 5 mM FDS resulted in a six fold increase relative to 10 mM Tu. A concentration of 10 mM Tu in leach solution also containing 40 mM Fe(III) resulted in a thirty fold increase in dissolution rate compared to 40 mM Fe(III) alone.

A column leach of different acid-cured copper ores was conducted with Tu added to the leach solution. A schematic description of the column setup is shown in FIG. 5. The column diameter was 8.84 cm, the column height was 21.6 cm, and the column stack height was 15.9 cm. The irrigation rate was 0.77 mL/min or 8 L/m2/h. The pregnant leach solution emitted from these columns was sampled for copper every 2 or 3 days using Atomic Absorption Spectroscopy (AAS).

The specific mineralogical composition of these ores are provided in Table 1. The Cu contents of Ore A, Ore B, and Ore C were 0.52%, 1.03%, and 1.22% w/w, respectively. Prior to leaching, ore was “acid cured” to neutralize the acid-consuming material present in the ore.

That is, the ore was mixed with a concentrated sulfuric acid solution composed of 80% concentrated sulfuric acid and 20% de-ionized water and allowed to sit for 72 hours. For one treatment using Ore C, Tu was added to the sulfuric acid curing solutions.

The initial composition of the leaching solutions included 2.2 g/L Fe (i.e. 40 mM, provided as ferric sulfate) and pH 2 for the control experiment, with or without 0.76 g/L Tu (i.e. 10 mM). The initial load of mineral in each column was 1.6 to 1.8 kg of ore. The superficial velocity of solution through the ore column was 7.4 L m−2 h−1. The pH was adjusted using diluted sulfuric acid. These two columns were maintained in an open-loop or open cycle configuration (i.e. no solution recycle) for the entire leaching period.

The results of leaching tests on the Ore A, Ore B and Ore C are shown in FIGS. 6, 7, and 8, respectively. The presence of Tu in the lixiviant clearly has a positive effect on the leaching of copper from the chalcopyrite. On average, the leaching rate in the presence of Tu was increased by a factor of 1.5 to 2.4 compared to the control tests in which the leach solutions did not contain Tu. As of the last time points depicted in FIGS. 6 to 8, copper extractions for columns containing Ore A, Ore B, and Ore C leached with a solution containing sulfuric acid and ferric sulfate alone, without added Tu, were 21.2% (after 198 days), 12.4% (after 50 days), and 40.6% (after 322 days), respectively. With 10 mM of added Tu, these extractions were 37.9%, 32.0%, and 72.3%, respectively.

Referring to FIG. 8, 2 mM Tu was added to the leach solution originally containing no Tu from day 322 onward, after which the leach rate increased sharply. From day 332 to day 448, the copper leached from this column increased from 40% to 58%, and rapid leaching was maintained throughout that period.

The averages for the last 7 days reported in FIG. 9 indicate that the leaching rate for acid-cured Ore C leached in the presence of 10 mM Tu is 3.3 times higher than for acid-cured Ore C leached in the absence of Tu, and 4.0 times higher than acid-cured and Tu-cured Ore C leached in the absence of Tu.

FIG. 10 shows the effect of Tu on solution potential. All potentials are reported against a Ag/AgCl (saturated) reference electrode. The solution potential of the leach solutions containing Tu was generally between 75 and 100 mV lower than the solution potential of leach solution that did not include Tu. Lower solution potentials are consistent with Tu working to prevent the passivation of chalcopyrite.

“Bottle roll” leaching experiments in the presence of various concentrations of Tu were conducted for coarse Ore A and Ore B. The tests were conducted using coarsely crushed (100% passing ½ inch) ore.

Prior to leaching, the ore was cured using a procedure similar to what was performed on the ore used in the column leaching experiments. The ore was mixed with a concentrated sulfuric acid solution composed of 80% concentrated sulfuric acid and 20% de-ionized water and allowed to settle for 72 hours to neutralize the acid-consuming material present in the ore. For several experiments, different concentrations of Tu were added to the ore using the sulfuric acid curing solutions.

The bottles used for the experiments were 20 cm long and 12.5 cm in diameter. Each bottle was loaded with 180 g of cured ore and 420 g of leaching solution, filling up to around one third of the bottle's volume.

The leaching solution from each bottle was sampled at 2, 4, 6 and 8 hours, and then every 24 hours thereafter. Samples were analyzed using atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS) for their copper content.

The conditions for the bottle roll experiments are listed in Table 2. Experiments #1 to #6 were conducted using only the original addition of Tu into the bottles. For experiments #7 to #11, Tu was added every 24 hours to re-establish the Tu concentration.

A positive effect of Tu on copper leaching was observed. For the coarse ore experiments, a plateau was not observed until after 80 to 120 hours. Tu was added periodically to the coarse ore experiments, yielding positive results on copper dissolution.

The effect of different concentrations of Tu in the leach solution on the leaching of coarse ore (experiments #1 to #11 as described in Table 2) is shown in FIGS. 11 and 10.

For ore B, Tu was periodically added every 24 hours to re-establish the thioruea concentration in the system and thus better emulate the conditions in the column leach experiments. As may be observed from FIG. 9, 8 mM and 10 mM Tu yielded higher copper dissolution results than the other Tu concentrations tested for ore A. A plateau in dissolution is not observed until after approximately 120 hours, which varied with Tu concentration as shown in FIG. 11.

TABLE 1
MineralIdeal FormulaOre AOre BOre C
ActinoliteCa2(Mg,Fe2+)5Si8O22(OH)21.8
BiotiteK(Mg,Fe2+)3AlSi3O10(OH)24.2
CalciteCaCO319.3 
ChalcopyriteCuFeS2 1.43.52.6
Clinochlore(Mg,Fe2+)5Al(Si3Al)O10(OH)815.0 
DiopsideCaMgSi2O63.5
GalenaPbS0.1
GypsumCaSO42H2O1.2
Hematiteα-Fe2O30.2
K-feldsparKAlSi3O817.910.8 
KaoliniteAl2Si2O5(OH)4 2.32.3
MagnetiteFe3O40.8
MolybdeniteMoS2<0.1
MuscoviteKAl2AlSi3O10(OH)221.96.041.6 
PlagioclaseNaAlSi3O8—CaAlSi2O813.625.4 
PyriteFeS2 2.38.0
QuartzSiO240.08.344.4 
RutileTiO2 0.50.9
SideriteFe2+CO30.1
Total100  100  100  

As may be observed from FIG. 12, 5 mM Tu yielded higher copper dissolution results than the other Tu concentrations tested for ore B. As with ore A, a plateau in dissolution is not observed until after approximately 80 to 120 hours, which varied with Tu concentration as shown in FIG. 12. Periodic addition of Tu resulted in increased copper dissolutions and produced a delay in the dissolution plateau.

Interestingly, solutions containing 100 mM Tu did not appear to be much more effective on copper extraction than those containing no Tu, and even worse at some time points. This is consistent with the results of Deschenes and Ghali, which reported that solutions containing 200 mM Tu (i.e. 15 g/L) did not improve copper extraction from chalcopyrite. Tu is less stable at high concentrations and decomposes. Accordingly, it is possible that, when initial Tu concentrations are somewhat higher than 30 mM, sufficient elemental sulfur may be produced by decomposition of Tu to form a film on the chalcopyrite mineral and thereby assist in its passivation. It is also possible that, at high Tu dosages, some copper precipitates from solution (e.g. see FIG. 17) to account for some of the low extraction results.

Full text: Click here
Patent 2024
Acids actinolite Bath biotite Calcite calomel Carbonate, Calcium Cells chalcopyrite Chemoradiotherapy Copper Dielectric Spectroscopy diopside Electrolytes factor A feldspar ferric sulfate ferrous disulfide galena Graphite Gypsum hematite Kaolinite Magnetite Minerals muscovite Oxide, Ferrosoferric plagioclase Quartz Radionuclide Imaging Recycling rutile siderite Sinusoidal Beds Spectrophotometry, Atomic Absorption Suby's G solution Sulfur sulfuric acid TU-100
The primary therapeutic modalities were determined using the Lugano and Paris staging system (Online Resource 1) and the HPI status. H. pylori eradication was performed in all patients with HPI and localized stage gastric MALT lymphoma. For first-line eradication therapy, a proton pump inhibitor (PPI)-based triple therapy regimen was administered for 2 weeks: PPI (standard dose twice a day), clarithromycin (0.5 g twice a day), and amoxicillin (1 g twice a day). 13C urea breath tests were performed in all patients for 3 months or at least 8 weeks after treatment completion, and at least 2 weeks after PPI withdrawal to confirm HPI eradication. For patients who failed first-line triple therapy, a second-line quadruple-therapy regimen consisting of PPI (standard dose twice a day), tripotassium dicitrato bismuthate (300 mg four times a day), metronidazole (500 mg thrice a day), and tetracycline (500 mg four times a day) was administered for 1–2 weeks.
Patients received radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or chemoradiotherapy if they did not achieve lymphoma regression following first- and second-line HPI eradication therapy, or were at the localized stage without initial HPI, or had advanced-stage gastric MALT lymphoma. For radiotherapy, the clinical target volume included the entire stomach and regional lymph nodes and was prescribed as 30.6 Gy over 17 fractions on the stomach [20 (link)]. The internal target volume (ITV) and planning target volume were set using the motion information obtained from the 4-dimensional CT for assessment of breathing motions and defined as an expansion of 5 mm from the ITV considering the set-up error of the patient [20 (link)]. Patients with the involvement of ≥ 2 organs were excluded from radiotherapy. The R-CVP was the primary systemic chemotherapy regimen, consisting of rituximab 375 mg/m2, cyclophosphamide 750 mg/m2, and vincristine 1.4 mg/m2 on day 1, and prednisolone 60 mg/m2 on days 1–5 every 21 days. Localized stage lesions involving small-sized mucosal layers in patients with initial HPI-negative findings could be selectively treated by endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) and close observation. In the case of chemoradiotherapy, we only used additional radiotherapy for consolidation purposes after chemotherapy by the physicians’ decision. To investigate the side effects of each treatment modality, we reviewed the medical records following the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0.
Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Aftercare Amoxicillin bismuth subcitrate Breath Tests Chemoradiotherapy Clarithromycin Cyclophosphamide Gastric lymphoma Helicobacter pylori Lymphoma Metronidazole Mucous Membrane Nodes, Lymph Patient Participation Patients Pharmacotherapy Physicians Prednisolone Proton Pump Inhibitors Radiotherapy Resection, Endoscopic Mucosal Rituximab Stomach Tetracycline Treatment Protocols Urea Vincristine
The primary objective of this study is to compare the adjuvant treatment efficacy in women with IR (stage IA grade 3 or stage IB grade 1–2) or HIR (stage IB grade 3 or stage II) endometrioid endometrial cancer (EEC) treated after surgery with molecular profile-based recommendations for either observation, or chemoradiotherapy or radiotherapy. We hypothesise that the efficacy of molecular-based treatment is not inferior to that of conventional clinicopathological-based treatment.
The secondary objective is to determine the preferred treatment for each subgroup following different recommendations with regard to the treatment efficacy, safety and tolerability. We hypothesise that de-escalated treatment strategies yield better quality-of-life outcomes without sacrificing treatment efficacy in patients with POLE mutation (POLEmut) and partial mismatch repair deficient (MMRd) or non-specific molecular profile (NSMP) subgroups. In contrast, escalated treatment is considered necessary for the p53-abnormal (p53abn) subgroup.
Publication 2023
Chemoradiotherapy Endometrial Carcinoma Mismatch Repair Mutation Operative Surgical Procedures Patients Pharmaceutical Adjuvants Radiotherapy Safety Woman
The PROBEAT trial is a prospective, multicentre phase III study led by Women’s Hospital of Zhejiang University Gynaecologic Oncology Group. Recruitment began on January 24, 2022, and is scheduled to end in December 2024.
The study schema is shown in Fig. 1. We plan to recruit 590 subjects with a HIR or IR of EEC. They will be randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to either the experimental arm or the standard arm. Patients in the experimental arm will receive molecular profile-based adjuvant treatment as follows: observation for the POLEmut subgroup, vaginal brachytherapy (VBT) for the MMRd or NSMP subgroups, and chemoradiotherapy for the p53abn profile subgroup. Adjuvant radiotherapy will be provided to the patients in the standard arm.
Publication 2023
Brachytherapy Chemoradiotherapy Neoplasms Patients Pharmaceutical Adjuvants Radiotherapy, Adjuvant Vagina Woman
This retrospective cohort study enrolled patients with HNC, with the exception of those with oral and salivary gland cancer, who underwent treatment at Shinshu University Hospital between January 2014 and March 2021. Patients who underwent surgical treatment were excluded from this cohort. One hundred and twenty-four patients who received CRT and whose pre- and post-treatment hematological data were available were reviewed (Fig. 4). The clinicopathological data of the patients, including age, sex, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), current smoking status, primary tumor site, clinical stage (according to the 8th edition of the TNM classification), histology, p16 status, and hematological data were obtained from the medical records. Serum albumin and CRP were measured using the modified bromocresol purple method and latex coagulating nephelometry, respectively. The NLR, LMR, PLR, CAR, PNI, and PINI were calculated as follows: total neutrophil count (/mm3) divided by the total lymphocyte count (/mm3), total lymphocyte count (/mm3) divided by the total monocyte count (/mm3), platelet count (/mm3) divided by the total lymphocyte count (/mm3), serum CRP (mg/dL) divided by serum albumin (g/dL), 10 × serum albumin (g/dL) + 0.005 × total lymphocyte count (/mm3), and 0.9 × serum albumin (g/dL) − 0.0007 × monocyte count (/mm3), respectively. These hematological markers were calculated based on blood tests conducted within 1 month from the first day of radiotherapy and within 1 week from the last day of radiotherapy. Pre- and post-treatment markers were termed as follows: pre-NLR, pre-LMR, pre-PLR, pre-CAR, pre-PNI, and pre-PINI for pretreatment markers and post-NLR, post-LMR, post-PLR, post-CAR, post-PNI, and post-PINI for post-treatment markers.

Flow diagram of patient selection. HNC head and neck cancer, CRT chemoradiotherapy, BRT bioradiotherapy; RT radiotherapy, ICT induction chemotherapy, SCC squamous cell carcinoma, LEC lymphoepithelial carcinoma.

Full text: Click here
Publication 2023
Bromcresol Purple Cancer of Head and Neck Cancer of Salivary Gland Carcinoma Chemoradiotherapy Hematologic Tests Hospital Administration Induction Chemotherapy Latex Lymphocyte Count Monocytes Neoplasms Nephelometry Neutrophil Operative Surgical Procedures Patients Platelet Counts, Blood Radiotherapy Serum Serum Albumin Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Top products related to «Chemoradiotherapy»

Sourced in United States, Austria, Canada, Belgium, United Kingdom, Germany, China, Japan, Poland, Israel, Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, Spain, Sweden
Prism 8 is a data analysis and graphing software developed by GraphPad. It is designed for researchers to visualize, analyze, and present scientific data.
Sourced in United States, China, Germany, United Kingdom, Japan, France, Canada, Australia, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, New Zealand, Spain, Israel, Sweden, Denmark, Macao, Brazil, Ireland, India, Austria, Netherlands, Holy See (Vatican City State), Poland, Norway, Cameroon, Hong Kong, Morocco, Singapore, Thailand, Argentina, Taiwan, Province of China, Palestine, State of, Finland, Colombia, United Arab Emirates
RPMI 1640 medium is a commonly used cell culture medium developed at Roswell Park Memorial Institute. It is a balanced salt solution that provides essential nutrients, vitamins, and amino acids to support the growth and maintenance of a variety of cell types in vitro.
Sourced in United States, China, United Kingdom, Germany, Australia, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Switzerland, New Zealand, Brazil, Belgium, India, Spain, Israel, Austria, Poland, Ireland, Sweden, Macao, Netherlands, Denmark, Cameroon, Singapore, Portugal, Argentina, Holy See (Vatican City State), Morocco, Uruguay, Mexico, Thailand, Sao Tome and Principe, Hungary, Panama, Hong Kong, Norway, United Arab Emirates, Czechia, Russian Federation, Chile, Moldova, Republic of, Gabon, Palestine, State of, Saudi Arabia, Senegal
Fetal Bovine Serum (FBS) is a cell culture supplement derived from the blood of bovine fetuses. FBS provides a source of proteins, growth factors, and other components that support the growth and maintenance of various cell types in in vitro cell culture applications.
Sourced in United States, China, United Kingdom, Germany, France, Australia, Canada, Japan, Italy, Switzerland, Belgium, Austria, Spain, Israel, New Zealand, Ireland, Denmark, India, Poland, Sweden, Argentina, Netherlands, Brazil, Macao, Singapore, Sao Tome and Principe, Cameroon, Hong Kong, Portugal, Morocco, Hungary, Finland, Puerto Rico, Holy See (Vatican City State), Gabon, Bulgaria, Norway, Jamaica
DMEM (Dulbecco's Modified Eagle's Medium) is a cell culture medium formulated to support the growth and maintenance of a variety of cell types, including mammalian cells. It provides essential nutrients, amino acids, vitamins, and other components necessary for cell proliferation and survival in an in vitro environment.
Sourced in United States, Austria, Japan, Belgium, New Zealand, United Kingdom, Germany, Denmark, Australia, France
R version 3.6.1 is a statistical computing and graphics software package. It is an open-source implementation of the S programming language and environment. R version 3.6.1 provides a wide range of statistical and graphical techniques, including linear and nonlinear modeling, classical statistical tests, time-series analysis, classification, clustering, and more.
Sourced in United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, France, Canada, China, Switzerland, Belgium, Australia, Italy, Lithuania, Brazil, Singapore, Ireland
The Power SYBR Green PCR Master Mix is a pre-formulated reagent designed for quantitative real-time PCR (qPCR) experiments. It contains SYBR Green I dye, optimized buffer components, and a DNA polymerase enzyme. The master mix is intended to simplify setup and improve the consistency of qPCR reactions.
Sourced in United States, Germany
The QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit is a nucleic acid extraction kit used for the purification of viral RNA from various sample types. It utilizes a silica-based membrane technology to efficiently capture and purify RNA molecules, providing high-quality RNA for downstream applications such as RT-qPCR, sequencing, and other molecular analyses.
Sourced in United States, Germany, United Kingdom, France
The SuperScript III Platinum One-Step qRT-PCR Kit is a reagent system designed for one-step quantitative reverse transcription-polymerase chain reaction (qRT-PCR) analysis. The kit combines a reverse transcriptase enzyme and a DNA polymerase in a single reaction mixture to facilitate the detection and quantification of target RNA sequences.
Sourced in United States, Japan, United Kingdom, Germany, Belgium, Austria, Italy, Poland, India, Canada, Switzerland, Spain, China, Sweden, Brazil, Australia, Hong Kong
SPSS Statistics is a software package used for interactive or batched statistical analysis. It provides data access and management, analytical reporting, graphics, and modeling capabilities.
Sourced in United States, China, Japan, Germany, United Kingdom, Canada, Estonia, Switzerland, France, Spain, Netherlands, Singapore, Italy, Lithuania
The QuantStudio 3 is a real-time PCR system designed for gene expression analysis, genotyping, and other molecular biology applications. It features a 96-well block, intuitive software, and diagnostic capabilities.

More about "Chemoradiotherapy"

Chemoradiotherapy, the synergistic combination of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, has emerged as a powerful strategy in the fight against cancer.
This approach leverages the distinct mechanisms of action and potentially complementary effects of these two modalities to enhance therapeutic efficacy.
Chemoradiotherapy regimens encompass a wide range of chemotherapeutic agents, radiation doses, and schedules, tailored to the specific type and stage of the cancer being treated.
Researchers and clinicians must carefully optimize these protocols to maximize the benefits for patients, such as increased tumor response rates, prolonged survival, and reduced risk of local recurrence, while minimizing the potential for toxicity.
The future of chemoradiotherapy optimization lies in advanced AI-driven platforms like PubCompare.ai.
This innovative solution empowers researchers and clinicians to effortlessly identify the best protocols from the ever-expanding literature, preprints, and patents.
By harnessing the power of AI, PubCompare.ai enables seamless comparisons, enhancing reproducibility and accuracy in chemoradiotherapy research.
To further support chemoradiotherapy research, various tools and techniques are available.
These include Prism 8 for statistical analysis, RPMI 1640 medium and DMEM for cell culture, FBS for cell growth, R version 3.6.1 for data analysis, Power SYBR Green PCR Master Mix for quantitative PCR, QIAamp Viral RNA Mini Kit for RNA extraction, SuperScript III Platinum One-Step qRT-PCR Kit for gene expression analysis, and SPSS Statistics for advanced statistical modeling.
The QuantStudio 3 platform provides a robust and reliable solution for real-time PCR experiments.
By combining the insights from MeSH term descriptions, metadescriptions, and leveraging the power of these advanced tools and techniques, researchers and clinicians can embark on a journey of chemoradiotherapy optimization, unlocking new possibilities in the fight against cancer.