Skip to content

Radiotherapy Related Skin Toxicity: Mepitel® vs. Standard Care in Patients With Locally Advanced Head-and-Neck Cancer

Radiotherapy Related Skin Toxicity: Mepitel® Film vs. Standard Care in Patients With Locally Advanced Head-and-Neck Cancer

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03047174
Acronym
RAREST-01
Enrollment
57
Registered
2017-02-08
Start date
2017-05-09
Completion date
2019-07-16
Last updated
2020-03-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Head and Neck Neoplasms

Keywords

Head and Neck Neoplasms, Radio(chemo)therapy

Brief summary

The aim for the present study named RAREST (RAdiotherapy RElated Skin Toxicity) is to compare the new dressing with the standard skin care. 168 patients receiving radiotherapy alone or radiochemotherapy for locally advanced head-and-neck cancer will be included. The primary aim is to investigate the rate of patients experiencing severe, stressful radiation dermatitis. The skin status will daily be inspected and assessed by specially trained doctors and nursing staff. It is expected that the new self-adhesive dressing is superior to standard care with respect to prevention of grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis in patients receiving radiotherapy or radio(chemo)therapy for a head-and-neck tumor. Thus, the dressing would be well qualified to become a new standard procedure at the skin care of patients with a head-neck tumor.

Detailed description

The primary goal of this randomized trial is to demonstrate that Mepitel® Film is superior to Standard Care with respect to prevent grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis (RD) in patients receiving radio(chemo)therapy up to 50 Gy for locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head-and-neck (SCCHN). The primary aim of this randomized multinational multicenter trial is to investigate the rate of patients experiencing grade ≥2 RD (CTCAE v4.03) until 50 Gy of radiotherapy (RT). Evaluation until 50 Gy of RT is the primary endpoint, since up to 50 Gy, the irradiated volume includes the primary tumor and the bilateral cervical and supraclavicular lymph nodes, and, therefore, is almost identical in all patients. After 50 Gy, the irradiated volume is much more individual, depending on location and size of the primary tumor, involvement of lymph nodes, and the treatment approach (definitive vs. adjuvant). This is a randomized, active-controlled, parallel-group trial, comparing the following treatments of radiation related skin toxicity in patients with head-and-neck cancer: Mepitel® Film (Arm A) vs. Standard Care (Arm B). About 4 contributing centers are planned to include an average of 21 patients/year. The recruitment duration of 168 patients = 24 months. The follow-up period will be 3 weeks. The total running time = 25 months. Stratification by prognostic factors: 1. Tumor site: oropharynx/oral cavity vs. hypopharynx/larynx 2. Treatment approach: radiochemotherapy vs. RT alone 3. Participating site In case of very small groups due to uneven distribution of stratification groups, strata might be connected for Analysis (before data base lock and final analysis of the data). This trial is for patients receiving definitive or adjuvant radio(chemo)therapy for locally advanced (SCCHN). Radiotherapy RT is administered using conventional fractionation (5 x 2.0 Gy per week). In all patients, the initial target volume includes the region of the primary tumor plus bilateral cervical and supraclavicular lymph nodes up to 50 Gy. Patients treated with adjuvant RT following complete resection of the primary tumor and the involved lymph nodes (R0-resection) receive a radiation boost of 10 Gy (5 x 2.0 Gy per week) to the regions of the primary tumor and the involved lymph nodes. In case of a microscopically incomplete resection (R1-resection), the boost dose to the primary tumor region is 16 Gy. In case of extra-capsular spread (ECS) of lymph nodes, the lymph nodes showing ECS receive an additional boost of 6 Gy (i.e. a cumulative boost dose of 16 Gy). Patients receiving definitive RT, receive a boost of 10 Gy (5 x 2.0 Gy/week) to the primary tumor, the involved lymph nodes, and the lymph node levels adjacent to the involved lymph nodes. An additional boost of another 10 Gy (5 x 2.0 Gy/week) is administered to the primary tumor and the involved lymph nodes. Treatment should be performed as either intensity-modulated RT (IMRT) or volumetric modulated arc therapy (VMAT) RT. The rate of patients experiencing grade ≥2 RD (CTCAE v4.03) until the 5. week of therapy (50 Gy) is in focus of this clinical study. Additionally another 2 weeks of RT (up to 70 Gy) might be performed. This further treatment will be conducted in accordance with common treatment guidelines. The treatment of the patients \> 50 Gy will not be analyzed within this study. The occurrence of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) will be documented for the duration of RT. The final dose of RT will be documented in the Case Report Form (CRF). Concomitant Chemotherapy In patients who receive definitive RT, concomitant chemotherapy with cisplatin or carboplatin is administered. The cumulative cisplatin or carboplatin dose at the end of the 5. week of RT (50 Gy) should be 200 mg/m2. This cumulative dose may either be achieved with 20 mg/m2 given with RT fractions 1-5 and 21-25, 25 mg/m2 given with RT fractions 1-4 and 21-24, or weekly doses of 40 mg/m2. Cisplatin or carboplatin will be administered after saline hydration as intravenous bolus infusion. The saline hyper-hydration will be given according to the investigational centre's routine. All patients treated with cisplatin or carboplatin in addition to RT must receive adequate anti-emetic therapy prior to the administration of cisplatin or carboplatin. It is recommended that a 5-Hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5HT3) antagonist (e.g. granisetron) and dexamethasone 8 mg i.v. are administered prior to each cycle of treatment. Quality assurance plan: Monitoring: The Center for Clinical Studies (ZKS) Lübeck will conduct clinical on-site monitoring at the German sites according to common guidelines and regulations. According to SOPs, all trial specific monitoring activities will be defined before starting the trial and documented in writing (monitoring manual). Patient registration and randomization The patients will be assigned two code numbers: the number of the contributing center plus a patient identification (ID) number, continuously ascending, starting with 001. After registration, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either Mepitel® Film (Arm A) or Standard Care (Arm B) for treatment of radiation related skin toxicity. A stratified randomization will be performed in blocks. The stratification will be conducted for about 4 centers, 2 treatment approaches, 2 tumor sites. The randomization will be performed centrally at the ZKS via fax. The proceeding is based on standard operating procedures (SOPs) of the ZKS. . Sample size calculation The primary goal of this randomized trial is to demonstrate that Mepitel® Film is superior to Standard Care with respect to prevent grade ≥2 RD in patients receiving radio(chemo)therapy up to 50 Gy for locally advanced SCCHN. The null hypothesis of equal rates of grade ≥2 skin toxicity is tested against the two-sided alternative hypothesis of different rates. Based on this hypothesis system, the sample size required for this trial is calculated taking into account the following assumptions: * A Chi-square Test will be applied * The two-sided significance level is set to 5% * In patients treated with radio(chemo)therapy for locally advanced SCCHN, previous studies have suggested rates of grade ≥2 skin toxicity of 86-92% if standard skin care was administered. * Based on these data, a rate of grade ≥2 skin toxicity of 85% can be assumed in the reference group (worst-case), i.e. in patients receiving standard care for skin toxicity. * Administration of Mepitel® Film will be considered to be clinically relevant, if the rate of grade ≥2 skin toxicity can be reduced to 65%. * The power to yield statistical significance if the the difference in rates is in fact 20 percentage points is set to 80%. Based on these assumptions, 80 patients are required per study arm within the Full Analysis Set (FAS). Taking into account that 5% of patients will not qualify for FAS, a total of 168 patients should be randomized. Statistical analysis General Considerations All data recorded in the CRFs describing the study population, toxicity and quality of life (QoL) will be analyzed descriptively. Categorical data will be presented in contingency tables with frequencies and percentages. Continuous data will be summarized with at least: frequency (n), median, quartiles, mean, SD, min and max. Number of patients with protocol deviations and listings describing the deviations will be provided. In general, chi-square tests will be used to compare percentages in a two-by-two contingency table, replaced by Fisher´s exact test if the expected frequency in at least one cell of the associated table is less than 5. Stratified two-by-two contingency tables will be analyzed using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel tests. Logistic regression models serve as multivariable methods for binary endpoint data. Comparison of ordinal variables between treatment arms will be performed using the asymptotic Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test, replaced by its exact version in case of ordinal categories with small number of categories and/or sparse data within categories. Any shift in location of quantitative variables between study groups will be performed with Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests as well. Time-to-event data will be analyzed by Kaplan-Meier methods, when merely non-informative censoring occurs. For statistical comparison, the logrank-test will be provided supplemented by multivariate Cox proportional hazards models. The data analysis will be performed according to the statistical analysis plan (SAP), finalised prior to database lock and prior to statistical analysis. Primary Endpoint The rates of patients experiencing grade ≥2 RD in patients receiving radio(chemo)therapy up to 50 Gy will be statistically compared using the Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel Chi-square test on a two-sided significance level of 5%. This test is the natural non-parametric extension of the Chi-square test for testing the treatment effect, while adjusting for the effects of the stratification variables used for randomization. For further assessment of the robustness of the results, a logistic regression model for grade ≥2 RD will be applied including the parameters used for stratification. In addition, a model including also additional patient characteristics will be fitted. The confirmatory evaluation will be performed within the FAS, the Per Protocol Set serves for further sensitivity analyses. Secondary endpoints Time to grade 2 RD until 50 Gy of RT is defined as the time from start of RT to at least grade 2 RD. Patients without grade 2 RD will be censored after the date of receiving a total dose of 50 Gy. The distribution of the time to grade 2 RD until administration of 50 Gy will be described using Kaplan-Meier methods. These analyses will be stratified by treatment arm and prognostic risk groups used for randomization. Estimates of median time to grade 2 RD and estimates of rates for specific time points will be extracted from the Kaplan-Meier analyses together with the associated 95% confidence limits. The treatment differences will be tested using a stratified log-rank test, stratified by stratification factors. Furthermore, Cox proportional hazards models will be applied to yield adjusted estimates of the associated hazard ratios. All other AEs as reported according to CTCAE v4.03 will also be subjected to statistical analysis. AE tables will present the total number of patients reporting at least one specific event and the maximum CTCAE grade. Patients reporting more than one episode of the same event will be counted only once by the worst CTCAE grade per patient. Special tables will be given for CTCAE Grade III/IV/V AEs. Analysis will be restricted to treatment related AEs and treatment related CTCAE Grade III/IV/V events. QoL will be evaluated using the validated EORTC quality of life questionnaire (QLQ)-C30 and EORTC QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires. Data will be scored according to the algorithm described in the respective scoring manuals. For all QoL domains and items, descriptive analyses will be presented stratified by visit and treatment arm. For descriptive statistical analysis, summary tables will be provided showing measures of location and dispersion (min, quartiles, median, max, mean, SD) stratified by visit, treatment arm. Individual score items will be subjected to statistical analysis. Absolute changes of QoL-scores from baseline will be tabulated stratified by treatment group and visit. For graphical illustrations, Box-Whisker diagrams will be presented across visits for each treatment group. Nonparametric (exact) Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney tests will be applied for exploratory comparison purposes. Additional details of the QoL analysis will be described in the SAP.

Interventions

Mepitel® Film is a gentle, sterile, transparent, breathable film dressing consisting of polyurethane film coated with a special contact layer. The film dressing is supported with a paper frame for ease of application. Mepitel® Film is an ultra thin, transparent, breathable soft silicone film dressing.

OTHERStandard Care

Cream: Fatty cream with 2-5% urea is applied to the irradiated skin 3-4 times daily. Mometasone furoate cream: In addition to the fatty cream with 2-5% urea, mometasone furoate cream (solution 0.1%) is applied to the irradiated skin once daily.

Sponsors

University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SUPPORTIVE_CARE
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 80 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Histologically proven locally advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head-and-neck (SCCHN) * Conventionally fractionated (5x2 Gy per week) definitive or adjuvant radio(chemo)therapy * Age ≥18 years * Written informed consent * Capacity of the patient to contract

Exclusion criteria

* N3 stage (lymph nodes \>6 cm) * Distant metastases (M1) * Pregnancy, Lactation * Treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-antibodies (either given or planned) * Expected non-compliance

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.
Median Number of Radiation Fractions Until Occurence of Grade 2 Dermatitisup to 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)The number of fractions of radiotherapy up to 50 Gy (50 Gy = 25 fractions) was counted in the intent-to-treat population, until grade 2 radiation dermatitis occurred.
Median Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 50 Gyat 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)The pain score will be assessed by using a numeric self rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain) points.
Median Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 60 Gyat 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)The pain score will be assessed by using a numeric self rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain) points.
Change in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of Radiotherapyat 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)Quality of Life was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires. For QLQ-C30, scoring of global health status and functional scales (physical functioning, role functioning, emotional functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning) were assessed. Scores ranged from 0 to 100. A higher score represented a higher level of quality of life (global health status) and a higher level of functioning (functional scales). For QLQ-H&N35, symptom scales (pain, problems with swallowing, senses problems, speech problems, trouble with social eating, trouble with social contact) were assessed Scores ranged from 0 to 100. A higher score represented a higher level of symptomatology/problems. For both questionnaires (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35), the change between baseline and follow up at 50 Gy for each item was calculated by using the mean value of the differences between both time points of the evaluable patients.
Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Countries

Germany

Participant flow

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® Film
Mepitel® Film is a gentle, sterile, transparent, breathable film dressing consisting of polyurethane film coated with a special contact layer. The film dressing is supported with a paper frame for ease of application. Mepitel® Film is an ultra thin, transparent, breathable soft silicone film dressing. Mepitel® Film: Mepitel® Film is a gentle, sterile, transparent, breathable film dressing consisting of polyurethane film coated with a special contact layer. The film dressing is supported with a paper frame for ease of application. Mepitel® Film is an ultra thin, transparent, breathable soft silicone film dressing.
28
Arm B: Treatment With Standard Care
Cream: Fatty cream with 2-5% urea is applied to the irradiated skin 3-4 times daily. Mometasone furoate cream: In addition to the fatty cream with 2-5% urea, mometasone furoate cream (solution 0.1%) is applied to the irradiated skin once daily.
29
Total57

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicTotalArm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmArm B: Treatment With Standard Care
Age, Customized
Age
<=62 years
29 Participants15 Participants14 Participants
Age, Customized
Age
>=63 years
28 Participants13 Participants15 Participants
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score
0-1
56 Participants28 Participants28 Participants
Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance score
2
1 Participants0 Participants1 Participants
Histologic grading
G 1-2
33 Participants17 Participants16 Participants
Histologic grading
G 3
21 Participants9 Participants12 Participants
Histologic grading
Gx
3 Participants2 Participants1 Participants
Human papilloma virus (HPV) status
Negative
34 Participants18 Participants16 Participants
Human papilloma virus (HPV) status
Positive
18 Participants8 Participants10 Participants
Human papilloma virus (HPV) status
Unknown
5 Participants2 Participants3 Participants
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Caucasian
57 Participants28 Participants29 Participants
Region of Enrollment
Germany
57 participants28 participants29 participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
11 Participants6 Participants5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
46 Participants22 Participants24 Participants
Surgery prior to radiotherapy
No
28 Participants13 Participants15 Participants
Surgery prior to radiotherapy
Yes
29 Participants15 Participants14 Participants
Tumor site
Hypopharynx
12 Participants5 Participants7 Participants
Tumor site
Larynx
11 Participants6 Participants5 Participants
Tumor site
Oral cavity
10 Participants4 Participants6 Participants
Tumor site
Oropharynx
24 Participants13 Participants11 Participants
Tumor stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer)
Stage II
5 Participants3 Participants2 Participants
Tumor stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer)
Stage III
14 Participants7 Participants7 Participants
Tumor stage (American Joint Committee on Cancer)
Stage IV
38 Participants18 Participants20 Participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
2 / 281 / 29
other
Total, other adverse events
27 / 2829 / 29
serious
Total, serious adverse events
6 / 2811 / 29

Outcome results

Primary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Per Protocol Set

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis3 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis6 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis9 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis18 Participants
Secondary

Change in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of Radiotherapy

Quality of Life was assessed using the EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35 questionnaires. For QLQ-C30, scoring of global health status and functional scales (physical functioning, role functioning, emotional functioning, cognitive functioning, social functioning) were assessed. Scores ranged from 0 to 100. A higher score represented a higher level of quality of life (global health status) and a higher level of functioning (functional scales). For QLQ-H&N35, symptom scales (pain, problems with swallowing, senses problems, speech problems, trouble with social eating, trouble with social contact) were assessed Scores ranged from 0 to 100. A higher score represented a higher level of symptomatology/problems. For both questionnaires (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-H&N35), the change between baseline and follow up at 50 Gy for each item was calculated by using the mean value of the differences between both time points of the evaluable patients.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: For evaluations with the QLQ-C30 questionnaire, data of 19 patients (3 in Arm A, 16 in Arm B) were available, and for evaluations with the QLQ-H\&N35 questionnaire, data of 18 patients (3 in Arm A, 15 in Arm B).

ArmMeasureGroupValue (MEAN)Dispersion
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in global health status11.11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.73
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in physical functioning-2.22 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 7.7
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in role functioning0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.67
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in cognitive functioning0.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 0
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in emotional functioning-5.56 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 9.62
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in social functioning-16.67 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.57
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding pain-19.44 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.25
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding problems with swallowing-13.89 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 4.81
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding senses problems-22.22 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.69
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding speech problems-7.41 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 12.83
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding trouble with social eating-5.56 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.97
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding trouble with social contact-2.22 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 3.85
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding trouble with social eating-20.24 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.98
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in global health status19.79 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 16.07
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding pain-30.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 30.67
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in physical functioning-15.0 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 18.14
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding speech problems-17.04 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 13.36
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in role functioning-16.67 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 23.57
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding problems with swallowing-26.11 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 34.2
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in cognitive functioning-4.17 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 20.64
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding trouble with social contact-1.89 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 8.79
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in emotional functioning-3.65 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 19.95
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange regarding senses problems-37.78 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 33.61
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareChange in Quality of Life Between Screening and 50 Gy of RadiotherapyChange in social functioning1.04 score on a scaleStandard Deviation 26.15
Secondary

Median Number of Radiation Fractions Until Occurence of Grade 2 Dermatitis

The number of fractions of radiotherapy up to 50 Gy (50 Gy = 25 fractions) was counted in the intent-to-treat population, until grade 2 radiation dermatitis occurred.

Time frame: up to 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Intention-to-treat Population who were evaluable for median number of radiation fractions (up to 50 Gy) until occurence of grade 2 dermatitis

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmMedian Number of Radiation Fractions Until Occurence of Grade 2 Dermatitis23 number of fractions of radiotherapy
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareMedian Number of Radiation Fractions Until Occurence of Grade 2 Dermatitis23 number of fractions of radiotherapy
Secondary

Median Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 50 Gy

The pain score will be assessed by using a numeric self rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain) points.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Intention-to-treat Population who were evaluable for pain at 50 Gy.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmMedian Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 50 Gy0.0 score on a scale
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareMedian Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 50 Gy0.0 score on a scale
Secondary

Median Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 60 Gy

The pain score will be assessed by using a numeric self rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain) points.

Time frame: at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Intention-to-treat Population who were evaluable for pain at 60 Gy.

ArmMeasureValue (MEDIAN)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmMedian Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 60 Gy2.0 score on a scale
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareMedian Pain Score at the Irradiated Skin at 60 Gy2.5 score on a scale
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Intention-to-Treat Population

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis8 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis15 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis10 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis18 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Intention-To-Treat Population who were evaluable for radiation dermatitis at 60 Gy.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis15 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis8 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis16 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis11 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)

Population: Per Protocol Set

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis4 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis3 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis15 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥2 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥2 radiation dermatitis11 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Intention-To-Treat Population

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis0 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis23 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis0 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis28 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 50 Gy (about 5 weeks)

Population: Per Protocol Set

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis0 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis9 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis0 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 50 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis27 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Intention-to-treat Population who were evaluable for radiation dermatitis at 60 Gy.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis1 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis22 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis3 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Intention-to-treat Population)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis24 Participants
Secondary

Number of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)

Radiation dermatitis has been assessed according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), version 4.03.

Time frame: at 60 Gy (about 6 weeks)

Population: Patients of the Per Protocol Set who were evaluable for radiation dermatitis at 60 Gy.

ArmMeasureCategoryValue (COUNT_OF_PARTICIPANTS)
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis1 Participants
Arm A: Treatment With Mepitel® FilmNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis6 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis3 Participants
Arm B: Treatment With Standard CareNumber of Participants With Grade ≥3 Radiation Dermatitis at 60 Gy (Per Protocol Set)no grade ≥3 radiation dermatitis23 Participants

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Mar 7, 2026