- ICH GCP
- US-Register für klinische Studien
- Klinische Studie NCT03075072
Hippocampus spart Ganzhirnstrahlung im Vergleich zu stereotaktischer Strahlung bei Patienten mit 5-20 Hirnmetastasen: Eine randomisierte Phase-III-Studie
Hippocampus Schonung der Ganzhirnstrahlung gegenüber stereotaktischer Strahlung (SRS) bei Patienten mit 5-20 Hirnmetastasen: Eine randomisierte klinische Phase-III-Studie
This research study is studying two different types of radiation as treatment for brain metastases (tumors in the brain that spread from a cancer that originated elsewhere in the body)
Studienübersicht
Status
Bedingungen
Intervention / Behandlung
Detaillierte Beschreibung
This research study is a Phase III clinical trial. Phase III clinical trials examine the safety and effectiveness of a treatment, often comparing it to another known treatment. In this case, the investigators are specifically looking at differences between two forms of radiation treatment in terms of subsequent quality of life.
In this research study, the investigators are comparing stereotactic (focused, pinpoint) radiation (in which each tumor is narrowly targeted) against whole brain radiation (radiation targeting the entire brain) in the treatment of brain metastases. Currently whole brain radiation is the standard option for patients with 5-20 brain metastases. Stereotactic radiation is the standard option for patients with 1-4 brain metastases. Among patients with 1-4 brain metastases, recently published studies suggest that stereotactic radiation results in fewer neurologic side effects than whole brain radiation. It also yields better quality of life in this population. It remains unknown whether stereotactic radiation improves quality of life in patients with 5-20 brain metastases relative to whole brain radiation. In this study, the investigators seek to determine which of the two methods of study treatment results in a better subsequent quality of life for patients with 5-20 brain metastases.
Studientyp
Einschreibung (Tatsächlich)
Phase
- Unzutreffend
Kontakte und Standorte
Studienorte
-
-
Massachusetts
-
Boston, Massachusetts, Vereinigte Staaten, 02115
- Brigham and Women's Hospital
-
Boston, Massachusetts, Vereinigte Staaten, 02116
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute
-
-
Teilnahmekriterien
Zulassungskriterien
Studienberechtigtes Alter
Akzeptiert gesunde Freiwillige
Studienberechtigte Geschlechter
Beschreibung
Inclusion Criteria:
- Participants must have a biopsy proven solid malignancy with untreated (by radiation) intracranial lesions radiographically consistent with or pathologically proven to be brain metastases. Patients who have undergone prior systemic therapy are eligible
- Five-twenty intracranial lesions must be present on MRI of the brain
- Age 18-80 years at diagnosis of brain metastases
- Karnofsky performance status of at least 70
Exclusion Criteria:
- Participants who have undergone prior radiation for brain metastases.
- Patients who have undergone resection of one or more brain metastases but who have not yet started adjuvant radiotherapy are eligible for the study
- Participants who cannot undergo a brain MRI
- Participants who cannot receive gadolinium (MRI contrast)
- Participants with stage IV-V chronic kidney disease or end stage renal disease
- Participants with widespread, definitive leptomeningeal disease
- Participants with small cell lung cancer, lymphoma, or myeloma
- Participants with a maximum tumor diameter exceeding 5 cm (if not resected)
Studienplan
Wie ist die Studie aufgebaut?
Designdetails
- Hauptzweck: Behandlung
- Zuteilung: Zufällig
- Interventionsmodell: Parallele Zuordnung
- Maskierung: Keine (Offenes Etikett)
Waffen und Interventionen
Teilnehmergruppe / Arm |
Intervention / Behandlung |
|---|---|
|
Aktiver Komparator: Whole Brain Radiation
|
Treatment of the whole brain with radiation. When possible the hippocampus will be spared from radiation. |
|
Experimental: Stereotactic Radiation (SRS)
|
Focused radiation to each individual brain metastasis without treatment of the remainder of the brain. |
Was misst die Studie?
Primäre Ergebnismessungen
Ergebnis Maßnahme |
Maßnahmenbeschreibung |
Zeitfenster |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in MD Anderson Symptom Inventory - Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT) Score
Zeitfenster: Baseline and 6 months post-Baseline
|
Questionnaire - MD Anderson Symptom Inventory - Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT). Results reflect patient-reported symptoms. Here they are presented as a mean change: the difference in the weighted mean of symptom severity and interference scores at baseline versus at 6 months. The difference between these scores is the mean change reported below. The MD Anderson Symptom Inventory has a scale of 0-10, 0 being not present and 10 being as bad as the patient could imagine. The calculated score change has a range of -10 to 10; -10 being the best. Change in score is calculated as the composite weighted means of symptom severity and interference at 6 months minus the composite weighted means of symptom severity and interference at baseline. |
Baseline and 6 months post-Baseline
|
Sekundäre Ergebnismessungen
Ergebnis Maßnahme |
Maßnahmenbeschreibung |
Zeitfenster |
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Survival
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical Parameter. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of deaths that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Neurologic Death
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical parameter to be assessed via review of study visits and medical records indicating cause of death (neurologic versus systemic). Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of New Brain Metastases
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Radiographic assessment of first appearance of new brain metastases. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Local Recurrence of Treated Brain Tumor(s)
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Radiographic assessment of first local recurrence in the 5-20 brain metastases that were initially treated with radiation. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Progressive Intracranial Disease
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Radiographic assessment of first instance of progressive intracranial disease. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Radiographic Radiation Necrosis
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Radiographic assessment of first appearance of radiation necrosis. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Leptomeningeal Disease
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Radiographic assessment of first appearance of leptomeningeal disease. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Dexamethasone Initiation
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Assessing time to dexamethasone initiation in patients who were not taking steroids at enrollment. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Development of Seizures
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical assessment of first post-treatment seizure as assessed during routine study visits and via medical record review. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Salvage Stereotactic Radiation
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical assessment of first use of salvage stereotactic radiation. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Salvage Whole Brain Radiation
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical assessment of first use of salvage whole brain radiation with or without hippocampal avoidance. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
12 Month Cumulative Incidence of Salvage Neurosurgical Resection
Zeitfenster: Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
Clinical assessment of first use of neurosurgical resection as salvage therapy. Here we report the number of patients analyzed for the outcome as well as the number of events that occurred. We then report the 12 Month Cumulative Incidence with a 95% Confidence Interval. |
Through study completion, an average of 1 year
|
|
Mean Barthel Index Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Barthel Index ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater functional independence. A greater difference between the groups indicates greater functional independence in the stereotactic arm. Here we report the mean Barthel Index score at baseline for both arms. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Barthel Index Score at 4-months and 12-months Post-baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months
|
Barthel Index ranges from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating greater functional independence. A greater difference between the groups indicates greater functional independence in the stereotactic arm. Here we report the mean difference (95% Confidence Interval) at each timepoint. |
4 Months and 12 months
|
|
Karnofsky Performance Status
Zeitfenster: Baseline to 12 Months
|
The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) is a tool designed to assess a cancer patient's functional status. Scores range from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better function. Scores 90-100 indicate that the patient is independent and can perform daily activities with little to no effort. A score of 80 indicates that the patient can conduct their normal activities with some effort. A score of 70 indicates that a patient can care for themself but cannot carry on normal activities independently. Here we report the least squares mean Karnofsky Performance Score for each arm based on the Karnofsky Performance Status Scale at each timepoint from Baseline to 12 Months post-baseline. |
Baseline to 12 Months
|
|
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Total Recall Z-Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Total Recall (HVLT-R Total Recall) z-score in each arm at baseline. The HVLT-R Total Recall test measures rote verbal learning across 3 trials administered in one sitting. Scores were transformed into z scores. Z scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The Z-Score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Total Recall Mean Z-Score at 4-Months and 12-Months Post-baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 Months
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Total Recall (HVLT-R Total Recall) z-score in each arm at the given timepoint. The HVLT-R Total Recall test measures rote verbal learning across 3 trials administered in one sitting. Scores were transformed into z scores. Z scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The Z-Score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. |
4 Months and 12 Months
|
|
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall Z-Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall Z score at baseline. This test measures delayed memory function. Scores were transformed into z scores. Z scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The Z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall Z Scores at 4 Months and 12 Months
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months post-baseline
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Delayed Recall Z score at the given timepoint. This test measures delayed memory function. Scores were transformed into z scores. Z scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The Z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. |
4 Months and 12 months post-baseline
|
|
Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Recognition Z Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Recognition z scores in each arm at baseline. The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised Recognition measures memory storage and recognition. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the populaion mean. Larger, positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. Here we report the mean z score in each arm at baseline. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Recognition Z-score at 4 Months and 12 Months
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 Months post baseline
|
Here we report the mean Hopkins Verbal Learning Test-Revised Recognition z scores in each arm at the given timepoint. The Hopkins Verbal Learning Test - Revised Recognition measures memory storage and recognition. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the populaion mean. Larger, positive z scores indicate better neurocognitive function. Here we report the mean z score in each arm at the given timepoint. |
4 Months and 12 Months post baseline
|
|
Trail Making Test A, Z Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean Trail Making Test A z score in each arm at baseline. The Trail Making Test A measures visuomotor processing speed. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger, positive z scores inicate better visuomotor processing speed. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Trail Making Test A Z-Score From Baseline at 4 Months and 12 Months
Zeitfenster: at 4 Months and 12 Months
|
Here we report the mean Trail Making Test A z score in each arm at the given timepoint. The Trail Making Test A measures visuomotor processing speed. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger, positive z scores inicate better visuomotor processing speed. |
at 4 Months and 12 Months
|
|
Trail Making Test B Z Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean Trail Making Test B z score in each arm at baseline. The Trail Making Test B measures visuomotor processing speed. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger, positive z scores inicate better visuomotor processing speed. |
Baseline
|
|
Trail Making Test B Z Score at 4 Months and 12 Months Post-baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months post-baseline
|
Here we report the mean Trail Making Test B z score in each arm at the given timepoint. The Trail Making Test B measures visuomotor processing speed. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger, positive z scores inicate better visuomotor processing speed. |
4 Months and 12 months post-baseline
|
|
Controlled Oral Word Test Z Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the mean controlled oral word test z score in each arm at baseline. The controlled oral word test (COWAT) measures verbal fluency. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. A larger positive z score indicates better performance. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Controlled Oral Word Test Z Score at 4 Months and 12 Months Post Baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
Here we report the change in mean controlled oral word test z score in each arm at the given timepoints from baseline. The controlled oral word test (COWAT) measures verbal fluency. Scores were transformed into z scores. z Scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The z score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. A larger positive z score indicates better performance. |
4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
|
Mini-Mental State Examination Mean at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Here we report the Mini-Mental State Examination mean in each arm at baseline. The Mini-Mental State Examination measures global cognition on a scale from 0 to 30. Higher scores indicate better perfromance. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Mini-Mental State Examination Score at 4 Months and 12 Months Post Baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
Here we report the change in the mean Mini-Mental State Examination z score in each arm at the given timepoints. The Mini-Mental State Examination Scores measures global cognition on a scale from 0 to 30. Test scores were transformed into z scores Larger positive scores indicate better performance. Z scores greater than 2.0 indicate exceptionally high function, between 1.36 and 2.0 indicate above average function, between 0.68 and 1.35 indicate high average function, between -0.67 and 0.67 indicate average function, between -0.68 and -1.35 indicate low average function, between -1.36 and -2.0 indicate below average function, and less than -2.0 indicate exceptionally low. The Z-Score central value is 0 and represents the population mean. Larger, positive differences indicate better global cognition. |
4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
|
Medical Outcomes Study Cognitive Functioning Scale-Revised Normative Score at Baseline
Zeitfenster: Baseline
|
Scores global cognition on a scale from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better cognitive function. Scores were transformed into normative scores ranging from 7.51 to 58.61. Larger scores indicate better function. |
Baseline
|
|
Change in Medical Outcomes Study Cognitive Functioning Scale-Revised Normative Scores at 4 Months and 12 Months Post Baseline
Zeitfenster: 4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
Scores global cognition on a scale from 0 to 100. Higher scores indicate better cognitive function. Scores were transformed into normative scores ranging from 7.51 to 58.61. Larger positive differences indicate better function. |
4 Months and 12 months post baseline
|
Mitarbeiter und Ermittler
Sponsor
Mitarbeiter
Ermittler
- Hauptermittler: Ayal Aizer, MD MHS, Brigham and Women's Hospital
Publikationen und hilfreiche Links
Allgemeine Veröffentlichungen
- Ayal Aizer et al. Stereotactic radiation versus hippocampal avoidance whole brain radiation in patients with 5-20 brain metastases: A multicenter, phase 3 randomized trial.. J Clin Oncol 43, 2011-2011(2025). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2025.43.16_suppl.2011
- Aizer A et al. Multicenter, Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Stereotactic Radiation vs. Hippocampal Avoidance Whole Brain Radiation in Patients with 5-20 Brain Metastases: Recurrence, Salvage Therapy, and Mortality Endpoints International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics, 123, S33-S34
- Michael Parsons, Kee-Young Shin, Jennifer Nosker, Shyam Tanguturi, Paul Catalano, Daphne Haas-Kogan, Jaroslaw Hepel, Marciana Johnson, Grant Benham, Ivy Ricca, Rifaquatn Rahma, Ayal Aizer, NCOG-20. Stereotactic radiation versus hippocampal avoidant whole brain radiation in patients with 5-20 brain metastases: Cognitive outcomes of 12-month survivors, Neuro-Oncology, Volume 27, Issue Supplement_5, November 2025, Pages v325-v326, https://doi.org/10.1093/neuonc/noaf201.1287
- Aizer AA, Shin KY, Catalano PJ, Ricca I, Johnson M, Benham G, Roper K, Spicer B, Mann E, Nosker J, Parsons MW, Mendu ML, Hepel J, Chipidza F, Krishnan M, Shi DD, Lamba N, Pashtan I, Peng L, Alexander B, Brown PD, Wen PY, Haas-Kogan DA, Rahman R, Tanguturi S. Treatment for Brain Metastases With Stereotactic Radiation vs Hippocampal-Avoidance Whole Brain Radiation: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2026 Apr 7;335(13):1127-1136. doi: 10.1001/jama.2026.0076.
Studienaufzeichnungsdaten
Haupttermine studieren
Studienbeginn (Tatsächlich)
Primärer Abschluss (Tatsächlich)
Studienabschluss (Geschätzt)
Studienanmeldedaten
Zuerst eingereicht
Zuerst eingereicht, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt hat
Zuerst gepostet (Tatsächlich)
Studienaufzeichnungsaktualisierungen
Letztes Update gepostet (Tatsächlich)
Letztes eingereichtes Update, das die QC-Kriterien erfüllt
Zuletzt verifiziert
Mehr Informationen
Begriffe im Zusammenhang mit dieser Studie
Schlüsselwörter
- Überleben
- Lebensqualität
- Brustkrebs
- Lungenkrebs
- Wiederauftreten
- Melanom
- Nierenkrebs
- Hippocampus
- Chemotherapie
- Neurokognitiv
- Nierenzellkarzinom
- Stereotaktisch
- WBRT
- SRS
- Strahlung
- Neurokognition
- Stereotaktische Radiochirurgie
- Bestrahlung des ganzen Gehirns
- Hirnmetastasen
- Bergung
- MDASI
- Hirnmetastasen
- Schonung des Hippocampus
- Vermeidung des Hippocampus
- Stereotaktische Strahlung
- Hippocampus
Zusätzliche relevante MeSH-Bedingungen
- Urogenitale Erkrankungen
- Erkrankungen des Gehirns
- Erkrankungen des zentralen Nervensystems
- Erkrankungen des Nervensystems
- Pathologische Prozesse
- Urogenitale Neoplasmen
- Neubildungen nach Standort
- Neubildungen
- Männliche Urogenitalerkrankungen
- Nierenerkrankungen
- Urologische Erkrankungen
- Weibliche Urogenitalerkrankungen
- Weibliche Urogenitalerkrankungen und Schwangerschaftskomplikationen
- Krankheitsattribute
- Erkrankungen der Atemwege
- Neubildungen nach histologischem Typ
- Lungenkrankheit
- Neubildungen, Drüsen und Epithelien
- Adenokarzinom
- Neubildungen der Atemwege
- Thoraxneoplasmen
- Hautkrankheiten
- Brusterkrankungen
- Urologische Neubildungen
- Karzinom
- Neuroektodermale Tumoren
- Neoplasmen, Keimzelle und Embryonal
- Neubildungen, Nervengewebe
- Neubildungen des Nervensystems
- Neuroendokrine Tumoren
- Nävi und Melanome
- Hauttumoren
- Neubildungen des zentralen Nervensystems
- Pathologische Zustände, Anzeichen und Symptome
- Haut- und Bindegewebserkrankungen
- Wiederauftreten
- Lungentumoren
- Neoplasien der Brust
- Karzinom, Nierenzelle
- Melanom
- Neubildungen des Gehirns
- Nierentumoren
- Untersuchungstechniken
- Therapeutika
- Chirurgische Eingriffe, operativ
- Enzyme
- Enzyme und Coenzyme
- Strahlentherapie
- Stereotaktische Techniken
- Neurochirurgische Verfahren
- Transferasen
- Alkyl- und Aryltransferasen
- Radiochirurgie
- Spermine -Synthase
Andere Studien-ID-Nummern
- 16-305
Plan für individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD)
Planen Sie, individuelle Teilnehmerdaten (IPD) zu teilen?
Arzneimittel- und Geräteinformationen, Studienunterlagen
Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Arzneimittelprodukt
Studiert ein von der US-amerikanischen FDA reguliertes Geräteprodukt
Produkt, das in den USA hergestellt und aus den USA exportiert wird
Diese Informationen wurden ohne Änderungen direkt von der Website clinicaltrials.gov abgerufen. Wenn Sie Ihre Studiendaten ändern, entfernen oder aktualisieren möchten, wenden Sie sich bitte an register@clinicaltrials.gov. Sobald eine Änderung auf clinicaltrials.gov implementiert wird, wird diese automatisch auch auf unserer Website aktualisiert .