Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
Conditions
Keywords
Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma, mobile platform, nutritional intervention, radiotherapy
Brief summary
To study the difference in the proportion of patients with nasopharyngeal carcinoma who lost more than 10% of their body weight within 1 month after radiotherapy and chemotherapy using the mobile platform for whole-process individualized nutritional rehabilitation management compared with conventional nutritional rehabilitation management.
Interventions
DEVICEmobile platform or not mobile platform
Intervention using WeChat
Sponsors
Sun Yat-sen University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
PREVENTION
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 70 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* 1.Voluntarily participate and sign the informed consent in writing. * 2.Stage III-IVa (AJCC 8th edition staging) . * 3.Received induction chemotherapy + concurrent chemoradiotherapy . * 4.18-70 years old. * 5.Pathologically diagnosed with non-keratinizing nasopharyngeal carcinoma (differentiated or undifferentiated, that is, WHO type II or III). * 6.No previous anti-tumor therapy . * 7.ECOG score 0-1. * 8.Ensure contraception during the study period. * 9.Hemoglobin (HGB) ≥90 g/L, white blood cell (WBC) ≥4×109/L, platelet (PLT) ≥100×109/L. * 10\. Liver function: ALT, AST \< 2.5 times the upper limit of normal (ULN), total bilirubin \< 2.0 × ULN. * 11\. Renal function: serum creatinine \<1.5×ULN. * 12.Able and willing to use a mobile phone or tablet to fill in the electronic scale.
Exclusion criteria
* 1.Received antitumor therapy in the past. * 2\. The pathology was keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma (WHO type I). * 3.Pregnant women who are in the reproductive period and have not taken effective contraceptive measures. * 4\. Has suffered from other malignant tumors (except for cured basal cell carcinoma or carcinoma in situ of the cervix). * 5.Patients with significantly low heart, liver, lung, kidney and bone marrow functions. * 6.Serious, uncontrolled medical diseases and infections. * 7.Concurrent use of other experimental drugs or other clinical trials. * 8\. Refused or unable to sign the informed consent to participate in the trial. * 9.Those who have other contraindications to treatment. * 10.Persons with personality or mental disorders, no capacity for civil conduct or limited capacity for civil conduct.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| weight loss | 1 month after chemoradiotherapy | Differences in the proportion of patients who lost \>10% of their body weight at 1 month after chemoradiotherapy between experimental and control groups |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| weight loss >10% | at the end of chemoradiotherapy | Differences in the proportion of patients who lost \>10% of their body weight at the end of chemoradiotherapy between experimental and control groups |
| weight loss >20% | at the end of chemoradiotherapy | Differences in the proportion of patients who lost \>20% of their body weight at the end of chemoradiotherapy between experimental and control groups |
| ncidence rate of adverse events (AEs) | at the end of chemoradiotherapy | Analysis of acute and late adverse events (AEs) are evaluated. Numbers of patients of treatment-related adverse events(acute toxicity) as assessed by CTCAE v5.0.Numbers of patients of late radiation toxicities were assessed using the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer late radiation morbidity scoring scheme. |
| change of PG-SGA | 1 month after chemoradiotherapy | Scored Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment (PG-SGA).It consists of two parts: the patient's self-assessment part and the medical staff's assessment part. The specific contents include seven aspects, including body weight, food intake, symptoms, activity and physical function, the relationship between disease and nutritional needs, metabolic needs, and physical examination. The first 4 Each aspect is evaluated by the patient himself, and the last three aspects are evaluated by the medical staff. The overall evaluation includes qualitative evaluation and quantitative evaluation. |
| change of NRS2002 | 1 month after chemoradiotherapy | The outstanding advantage of NRS2002 is that it can predict the risk of malnutrition, and can proactively and dynamically judge the changes in the nutritional status of patients, which is convenient for timely feedback of the nutritional status of patients, and provides evidence for adjusting nutritional support programs. It is a better nutritional risk screening tool. |
Countries
China
Outcome results
None listed