Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The major goal of this clinical study is to investigate to which extent high-precision radiotherapy (RT) with modern techniques can prevent progression or recurrence of motor deficits (weakness) of the legs following RT. In addition, it will be evaluated to which extent RT can lead to improvement of motor function, ambulatory status, sensory function and sphincter dysfunction, to pain relief and to improvement in quality of life, side effects and overall survival. For this purpose 44 patients who will receive modern high-precision RT treatment for the metastases on their vertebral bodies will be included into this phase 2 study. The results of the high-precision RT with a treatment of 5x5 Gray (Gy) in 1 week will be compared to data of a historical control group. The data set of the historical control group consists of more than 500 patients who received conventional RT with 5x4 Gy. The data collected in 1 week treatment will be compared. It is intended to show superiority regarding the local progression-free survival (LPFS) for the high-precision RT when compared with the conventional RT.
This is a multinational, multicenter study (single arm) supplemented by a comparison to a historical, propensity score matched control group (superiority study).
A total of 44 patients (40 patients + 10% for potential drop-outs) who will receive modern high-precision radiotherapy (RT) treatment for the metastases on their vertebral bodies are planned to take part in the clinical study. The historical control group treated with 5x4 Gy of conventional RT between 2001 and 2016 consists of more than 500 patients The primary aim of this study is to investigate the local progression-free survival (LPFS) of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) after 5x5 Gray (Gy) of high-precision RT and to demonstrate that this regimen results in significantly better 6-month LPFS than conventional RT with 5x4 Gy. For the high-precision RT volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT), stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) is allowed for treatment of patients with involvement of only one vertebra, if the required constraints can be met. LPFS is defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during RT and freedom from an in-field recurrence of MSCC (i.e. freedom from motor deficits due to a recurrence of MSCC in the previously irradiated parts of the spine) following RT. The LPFS rate will be assessed 6 months after the end of RT.
In patients treated with RT alone for MSCC, conventional RT with 10x3 Gy in 2 weeks results in similar motor function but significantly better LPFS than conventional RT with 5x4 Gy in 1 week. Since patients with MSCC are often significantly impaired, a RT regimen with an overall treatment time of only 1 week would be preferable if it resulted in similar LPFS as 10x3 Gy in 2 weeks. This may be achieved with 5x5 Gy in 1 week, since the equivalent dose in 2 Gy fractions (EQD2) with respect to tumor cell kill of 5x5 Gy and 10x3 Gy are similar. The tolerance dose of the spinal cord, 5x5 Gy can be safely administered with high-precision RT such as VMAT (or SBRT). Therefore, the present study investigates the LPFS after high-precision RT with 5x5 Gy in 1 week. To demonstrate superiority the patients of this study will be compared to a historical control group receiving conventional RT with 5x4 Gy in 1 week. If superiority regarding LPFS can be shown for high-precision RT with 5x5 Gy, patients with MSCC would benefit from this regimen, since they can achieve high LPFS rates with an RT regimen lasting only 1 week (5x5 Gy) instead of 2 weeks (10x3 Gy). This study aims to make a significant contribution to the most appropriate RT schedule for patients with MSCC.
In accordance with a previous study assessing local control of MSCC, the following patient characteristics will be recorded to allow adequate comparison with the historical, propensity-score matched control group:
It is recommended that the patients receive concomitant treatment with dexamethasone during the period of radiotherapy if indicated.
Quality assurance plan:
Monitoring: The Centre for Clinical Trials Lübeck will conduct clinical on-site monitoring at the German sites according to Good Clinical Practice and written standard operating procedures (SOPs) to ensure the patients' rights and safety as well as the reliability of trial results.
The frequency of monitoring visits per site will be defined depending on the recruitment rate and the quality of data.
Patient Registration:
The patients were assigned 2 code numbers, the number of the contributing center plus a patient identification number starting with 001 and chronologically ongoing.
Coordination and supervision of the inclusion of the patients will be performed by the Department of Radiation Oncology of the University of Lübeck, Germany.
Sample size calculation:
The primary goal of this study is to assess high-precision RT with 5x5 Gy in 1 week with respect to 6-month LPFS and to demonstrate that this rate is superior to conventional RT with 5x4 Gy with respect to LPFS of MSCC (hypothesis).
With respect to tumor cell kill, the EQD2 of 5x5 Gy is similar to the EQD2 of 10x3 Gy (31.3 Gy vs. 32.5 Gy) and higher than the EQD2 of 5x4 Gy (23.3 Gy) . In a previous prospective non-randomized study, the 6-month LPFS rates were 86% after longer-course RT and 67% after short-course RT, respectively (p=0.034). In that study, 95 of 117 patients (81%) in the longer-course RT group had received 10x3 Gy, and 91 of 114 patients (80%) in the short-course RT group had received 5x4 Gy. Thus, assuming - for the present study - that conventional RT with 5x4 Gy in fact results in a 6-month LPFS rate of 67%, an increase by roughly 20 percentage point is considered to be clinically minimal relevant and even appears to be realistic when applying high-precision RT with 5x5 Gy.
The sample size is chosen to obtain prospective data that can be interpreted on its own and to allow for comparison with historical data:
A sample size of at least 40 eligible patients is needed to estimate the probability of LPFS at 6 month with adequate precision, based on the following assumptions:
The aim of the confirmatory study is to compare the prospectively collected data with a historical, propensity-score matched cohort collected up to the time of data analysis. Assuming for simplicity and conservative power calculation that this comparison could be conducted with a simple Pearson-Chi-Square test using a two-sided significance level of 5% (10%), a power of 79% (86%) is reached, if 40 patients are treated with high-precision RT and roughly 400 patients of the historical control group qualify for Propensity-Score adjusted comparison and assuming that the expected 6-month LPFS are 87% and 67%, respectively. Taking into account that the more sophisticated propensity-score adjusted statistical analysis will increase statistical power, the power for treatment arm comparison reached with 40 eligible patients in the prospective part of the study can be assumed to be at least 80%.
Primary endpoint:
The primary endpoint (LPFS of MSCC) will be evaluated based on the sample size calculations. The evaluation will be performed in those patients, who are available for assessment of the primary endpoint and have received at least 80% of the planned RT dose. Due to the open nature of the study, a blind data review is not necessary. The safety population includes all patients who have received at least 1 fraction of high-precision RT.
LPFS is defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during RT and freedom from an in-field recurrence of MSCC (i.e. freedom from motor deficits due to a recurrence of MSCC in the previously irradiated parts of the spine) following RT. Deterioration of motor deficits during RT will be counted as LPFS of 0 months. Freedom from an in-field recurrence following RT will be referenced from the last day of RT. LPFS rates will be calculated for each potential prognostic factor using the Kaplan-Meier method. Differences between the Kaplan-Meier curves will be calculated with the log-rank test (univariate analysis). Factors that achieve significance (p<0.05) or show a trend (p<0.06) on univariate analysis will be additionally included in a multivariate analysis (Cox proportional hazards model).
Secondary endpoints:
The comparison of the high-precision RT group and the conventional RT group with respect to their effect on motor function and sensory function (improvement, no further progression, deterioration) will be evaluated with the ordered logit model adjusted for propensity score, because the data for the impact of RT on motor and sensory function are ordinal (-1 = deterioration, 0 = no further progression, 1 = improvement). An improvement or deterioration of the motor function will be defined as a change of at least 1 point on a 5-point scale. Post-RT ambulatory and sphincter dysfunction rates will be compared between both groups with the Chi-square test stratified for propensity score. Effect of RT on motor function, post-RT ambulatory rates, sensory function and sphincter dysfunction will be evaluated directly after RT and at 1, 3 and 6 months following RT in those patients who are alive and available for assessment. P-values of <0.05 are considered significant.
Overall survival (OS) will be counted from the last day of RT. OS rates will be calculated with the Kaplan-Meier-method. Differences between Kaplan-Meier curves will be analyzed with the log-rank test. Again, p-values of <0.05 are considered significant. Factors that achieve significance or show a trend (p<0.06) on univariate analysis will be included in a multivariate analysis (Cox proportional hazards model). The analysis of OS will be conducted in the intent-to-treat population.
Data regarding pain, quality of life and toxicity will only be assessed in the study group.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 week | Experimental | Patients with motor deficits of the lower extremities due to metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) will receive 5x5 Gy of high-precision RT in 1 week. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 week | Radiation | Patients included in this study will receive a high-precision radiotherapy with 5x5 Gy in 1 week |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 6 Months After Radiotherapy Without Deterioration of Motor Function During (or Directly After) Radiotherapy and Freedom From In-field Recurrence of Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression Following Radiotherapy | Local Progression Free Survival (LPFS) was defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during or one month following radiotherapy and freedom from in-field recurrence of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) following radiotherapy. An in-field recurrence was defined as a recurrence of MSCC associated with motor deficits in the region of the spinal cord that had been previously irradiated for MSCC. In case of clinical suspicion of sich a recurrence, a spinal MRI was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Time to in-field recurrence was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy, and the patients were followed for a maximum of 6 months after the end of radiotherapy. The values of 6-month LPFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | 6 months after the end of radiotherapy |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Motor Deficits Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Motor function was evaluated using the following scale. Improvement of motor function was defined as a decrease of at least 1 point. 0 = Normal strength
[Tomita T, et al., Acta Radiol Oncol 1983;22:135-143.] |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Dirk Rades, Professor | Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck and University Medical Center Schleswig-Holstein, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23562 Lübeck, Germany | Lübeck | 23562 | Germany |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 33413492 | Derived | Rades D, Cacicedo J, Conde-Moreno AJ, Segedin B, Lomidze D, Ciervide R, Hollaender NH, Schild SE. Comparison of 5 x 5 Gy and 10 x 3 Gy for metastatic spinal cord compression using data from three prospective trials. Radiat Oncol. 2021 Jan 7;16(1):7. doi: 10.1186/s13014-020-01737-7. | |
| 31812719 | Derived | Rades D, Cacicedo J, Conde-Moreno AJ, Segedin B, But-Hadzic J, Groselj B, Kevlishvili G, Lomidze D, Ciervide-Jurio R, Rubio C, Perez-Romasanta LA, Alvarez-Gracia A, Olbrich D, Doemer C, Schild SE, Hollaender NH. Precision Radiation Therapy for Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression: Final Results of the PRE-MODE Trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020 Mar 15;106(4):780-789. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.11.401. Epub 2019 Dec 5. |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 Week | Patients with motor deficits of the lower extremities due to metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) will receive 5x5 Gy of high-precision RT in 1 week. High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 week: Patients included in this study will receive a high-precision radiotherapy with 5x5 Gy in 1 week |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
|
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 Week | Patients with motor deficits of the lower extremities due to metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) will receive 5x5 Gy of high-precision RT in 1 week. High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 week: Patients included in this study will receive a high-precision radiotherapy with 5x5 Gy in 1 week |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Customized | Count of Participants |
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 6 Months After Radiotherapy Without Deterioration of Motor Function During (or Directly After) Radiotherapy and Freedom From In-field Recurrence of Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression Following Radiotherapy | Local Progression Free Survival (LPFS) was defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during or one month following radiotherapy and freedom from in-field recurrence of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) following radiotherapy. An in-field recurrence was defined as a recurrence of MSCC associated with motor deficits in the region of the spinal cord that had been previously irradiated for MSCC. In case of clinical suspicion of sich a recurrence, a spinal MRI was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Time to in-field recurrence was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy, and the patients were followed for a maximum of 6 months after the end of radiotherapy. The values of 6-month LPFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 6 months after the end of radiotherapy |
|
during the period of radiotherapy and up to 6 months during the period of follow up
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 Week | Patients with motor deficits of the lower extremities due to metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) will receive 5x5 Gy of high-precision RT in 1 week. High-precision RT 5x5 Gy in 1 week: Patients included in this study will receive a high-precision radiotherapy with 5x5 Gy in 1 week |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pneumonia | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | CTCAE v4.03 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | CTCAE 4.03 (MedDRA) | Non-systematic Assessment |
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prof. Dr. med. Dirk Rades | Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany | 0049 451 500 | 45400 | rades.dirk@gmx.net |
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP_ICF | Yes | Yes | Yes | Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, and Informed Consent Form | May 6, 2019 | Jan 30, 2020 | Prot_SAP_ICF_000.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013117 | Spinal Cord Compression |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D013118 | Spinal Cord Diseases |
| D002493 | Central Nervous System Diseases |
| D009422 | Nervous System Diseases |
| D013119 | Spinal Cord Injuries |
Not provided
Not provided
Single arm study
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Sensory Function Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Sensory function was evaluated with the following scale, modified in accordance to the classification of the American Spinal Injury Association. 0 = Absent
9 = Cannot be assessed [Baskin DS. Spinal cord injury. In Evans RW (Ed.), Neurology and trauma, WB Saunders, Philadelphia;1996, pp. 276-299.] | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Sphincter Dysfunction Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Sphincter dysfunction was rates as yes (presence of sphincter dysfunction) or no (absence of sphincter dysfunction). | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 3 Months Following Radiotherapy Without Deterioration of Motor Function During (or Directly Following) Radiotherapy and Freedom From In-field Recurrence of Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression Following Radiotherapy | Local Progression Free Survival (LPFS) was defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during or one month following radiotherapy and freedom from in-field recurrence of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) following radiotherapy. An in-field recurrence was defined as a recurrence of MSCC associated with motor deficits in the region of the spinal cord that had been previously irradiated for MSCC. In case of clinical suspicion of sich a recurrence, a spinal MRI was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Time to in-field recurrence was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy. The values of 3-month LPFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | 3 months after the end of radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 6 Months Following Radiotherapy | Overall Survival (OS) was defined as freedom from death of any cause. Time to death was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy, and the patients were followed for a maximum of 6 months after the end of radiotherapy. The values of 6-month OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | 6 months after the end of radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Who Experienced Relief of Pain at 1 Month Following Radiotherapy Compared to Baseline | Vertebral pain was measured with a numeric self-rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Pain relief was defined as improvement (=decrease of pain) by at least 2 points without increase of analgesics. Patients with baseline-scores of 0-1 points were not included, since improvement by 2 points was not possible. | Evaluation at 1 month following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Who Experienced Relief of Distress at 1 Month Following Radiotherapy Compared to Baseline | Distress (as an indicator of impairment of quality of life) was measured with the distress-thermometer. the patients rated their level of distress on a scale ranging from 0 (no distress) to 10 (extreme distress). Patients rated the distress they experienced during the last week and stated the reasons for distress from a list of items. An improvement (lower score) by 2 points was considered a clinically relevant relief of distress. Patients with baseline-scores of 0-1 points were not included, since improvement by 2 points was not possible. | Evaluation at 1 month following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Experiencing at Least One Grade >=2 Radiotherapy-related Toxicity | Toxicity was assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) (version 4) | during radiotherapy and up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
| Number of Participants Who Were Able to Walk Following Radiotherapy | Ambulatory status was assessed using the following scoring system: 0=Normal strength
A patient with a score equal to or less than 2 is considered "able to walk". Both participants that could and could not walk prior to radiotherapy have been included in this assessment. | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
| 29202720 | Derived | Rades D, Cacicedo J, Conde-Moreno AJ, Doemer C, Dunst J, Lomidze D, Segedin B, Olbrich D, Hollander NH. High-precision radiotherapy of motor deficits due to metastatic spinal cord compression (PRE-MODE): a multicenter phase 2 study. BMC Cancer. 2017 Dec 4;17(1):818. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3844-x. |
| Participants |
|
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Region of Enrollment | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| primary tumor type | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| interval from tumor diagnosis to MSCC | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| number of involved vertebrae | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| other bone metastases | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| visceral metastases | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| time developing motor deficits | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| ambulatory status | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score | Performance status was rated with the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG), ranging from 0 to 5 (lower grade=better performance status). 0: Fully active without restrictions.
[Oken et al., Am J Clin Oncol 1982;5:649-55.] | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| motor function | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| sensory function | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| sphincter dysfunction | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Distress (measured with the distress-thermometer) | Distress (as an indicator of impairment of quality of life) was measured with the distress-thermometer. The patients rated their level of distress on a scale ranging from 0 (no distress) to 10 (extreme distress). Patients rated the distress they experienced during the last week and stated the reasons for distress from a list of items. [Holland JC, et al. J Natl Comp Cancer Network 2013;11:190-209.] | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Pain (measured with a numeric self-rating scale) | Pain was measured with a numeric self-rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| OG000 |
| High-precision Radiotherapy 5x5 Gy in 1 Week |
Patients with motor deficits of the lower extremities due to metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) will receive 5x5 Gy of high-precision RT in 1 week. High-precision radiotherapy 5x5 Gy in 1 week: Patients included in this study will receive a high-precision radiotherapy with 5x5 Gy in 1 week |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Motor Deficits Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Motor function was evaluated using the following scale. Improvement of motor function was defined as a decrease of at least 1 point. 0 = Normal strength
[Tomita T, et al., Acta Radiol Oncol 1983;22:135-143.] | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Sensory Function Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Sensory function was evaluated with the following scale, modified in accordance to the classification of the American Spinal Injury Association. 0 = Absent
9 = Cannot be assessed [Baskin DS. Spinal cord injury. In Evans RW (Ed.), Neurology and trauma, WB Saunders, Philadelphia;1996, pp. 276-299.] | Patients who had sensory deficits prior to the start of radiotherapy. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Showing Improvement of Sphincter Dysfunction Following Radiotherapy (Best Response) | Sphincter dysfunction was rates as yes (presence of sphincter dysfunction) or no (absence of sphincter dysfunction). | Patients who had a sphincter dysfunction prior to the start of radiotherapy. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 3 Months Following Radiotherapy Without Deterioration of Motor Function During (or Directly Following) Radiotherapy and Freedom From In-field Recurrence of Metastatic Spinal Cord Compression Following Radiotherapy | Local Progression Free Survival (LPFS) was defined as freedom from progression of motor deficits during or one month following radiotherapy and freedom from in-field recurrence of metastatic spinal cord compression (MSCC) following radiotherapy. An in-field recurrence was defined as a recurrence of MSCC associated with motor deficits in the region of the spinal cord that had been previously irradiated for MSCC. In case of clinical suspicion of sich a recurrence, a spinal MRI was performed to confirm the diagnosis. Time to in-field recurrence was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy. The values of 3-month LPFS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 3 months after the end of radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Were Alive at 6 Months Following Radiotherapy | Overall Survival (OS) was defined as freedom from death of any cause. Time to death was calculated from the last day of radiotherapy, and the patients were followed for a maximum of 6 months after the end of radiotherapy. The values of 6-month OS were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. | Posted | Number | 95% Confidence Interval | percentage of participants | 6 months after the end of radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Experienced Relief of Pain at 1 Month Following Radiotherapy Compared to Baseline | Vertebral pain was measured with a numeric self-rating scale ranging from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain). Pain relief was defined as improvement (=decrease of pain) by at least 2 points without increase of analgesics. Patients with baseline-scores of 0-1 points were not included, since improvement by 2 points was not possible. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Evaluation at 1 month following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Experienced Relief of Distress at 1 Month Following Radiotherapy Compared to Baseline | Distress (as an indicator of impairment of quality of life) was measured with the distress-thermometer. the patients rated their level of distress on a scale ranging from 0 (no distress) to 10 (extreme distress). Patients rated the distress they experienced during the last week and stated the reasons for distress from a list of items. An improvement (lower score) by 2 points was considered a clinically relevant relief of distress. Patients with baseline-scores of 0-1 points were not included, since improvement by 2 points was not possible. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Evaluation at 1 month following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Experiencing at Least One Grade >=2 Radiotherapy-related Toxicity | Toxicity was assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) (version 4) | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | during radiotherapy and up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| Secondary | Number of Participants Who Were Able to Walk Following Radiotherapy | Ambulatory status was assessed using the following scoring system: 0=Normal strength
A patient with a score equal to or less than 2 is considered "able to walk". Both participants that could and could not walk prior to radiotherapy have been included in this assessment. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | up to 6 months following radiotherapy |
|
|
|
| 22 |
| 40 |
| 5 |
| 40 |
| 10 |
| 40 |
| Heart failiure | Cardiac disorders | CTCAE v4.03 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Unknown death (shortness of breath) | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | CTCAE v4.03 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Systemic aspergillosis | Infections and infestations | CTCAE v4.03 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Pulmonary embolism | Vascular disorders | CTCAE v4.03 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Diarrhea | Gastrointestinal disorders | CTCAE 4.03 (MedDRA) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
| Fatigue | General disorders | CTCAE 4.03 (MedDRA) | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
Not provided
Not provided
| D014947 | Wounds and Injuries |
| no toxicity |
|