脳転移が 5 ~ 20 の患者における海馬温存全脳放射線と定位放射線:第 III 相無作為化試験
5~20個の脳転移を有する患者における海馬温存全脳放射線と定位放射線(SRS):第III相ランダム化臨床試験
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)
調査の概要
詳細な説明
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.
研究の種類
入学 (実際)
段階
- 適用できない
連絡先と場所
研究場所
-
-
Massachusetts
-
Boston、Massachusetts、アメリカ、02115
- Brigham and Women's Hospital
-
Boston、Massachusetts、アメリカ、02116
- Dana Farber Cancer Institute
-
-
参加基準
適格基準
就学可能な年齢
健康ボランティアの受け入れ
受講資格のある性別
説明
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)
研究計画
研究はどのように設計されていますか?
デザインの詳細
- 主な目的:処理
- 割り当て:ランダム化
- 介入モデル:並列代入
- マスキング:なし(オープンラベル)
武器と介入
参加者グループ / アーム |
介入・治療 |
|---|---|
|
アクティブコンパレータ:Whole Brain Radiation
|
Treatment of the whole brain with radiation. When possible the hippocampus will be spared from radiation. |
|
実験的:Stereotactic Radiation (SRS)
|
Focused radiation to each individual brain metastasis without treatment of the remainder of the brain. |
この研究は何を測定していますか?
主要な結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Change in MD Anderson Symptom Inventory - Brain Tumor (MDASI-BT) Score
時間枠: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
|
二次結果の測定
結果測定 |
メジャーの説明 |
時間枠 |
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Survival
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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)
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
時間枠: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
|
協力者と研究者
捜査官
- 主任研究者:Ayal Aizer, MD MHS、Brigham and Women's Hospital
出版物と役立つリンク
一般刊行物
- 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.
研究記録日
主要日程の研究
研究開始 (実際)
一次修了 (実際)
研究の完了 (推定)
試験登録日
最初に提出
QC基準を満たした最初の提出物
最初の投稿 (実際)
学習記録の更新
投稿された最後の更新 (実際)
QC基準を満たした最後の更新が送信されました
最終確認日
詳しくは
本研究に関する用語
キーワード
追加の関連 MeSH 用語
- 泌尿生殖器疾患
- 脳疾患
- 中枢神経系疾患
- 神経系疾患
- 病理学的プロセス
- 泌尿生殖器腫瘍
- 部位別新生物
- 新生物
- 男性の泌尿生殖器疾患
- 腎臓病
- 泌尿器疾患
- 女性の泌尿生殖器疾患
- 女性の泌尿生殖器疾患と妊娠合併症
- 疾患の属性
- 気道疾患
- 組織型別の新生物
- 肺疾患
- 新生物、腺および上皮
- 腺癌
- 気道腫瘍
- 胸部腫瘍
- 皮膚疾患
- 乳房の病気
- 泌尿器科の新生物
- がん
- 神経外胚葉性腫瘍
- 新生物、生殖細胞および胚
- 新生物、神経組織
- 神経系腫瘍
- 神経内分泌腫瘍
- 母斑とメラノーマ
- 皮膚腫瘍
- 中枢神経系腫瘍
- 病理学的状態、徴候および症状
- 皮膚および結合組織疾患
- 再発
- 肺新生物
- 乳房腫瘍
- がん、腎細胞
- メラノーマ
- 脳腫瘍
- 腎腫瘍
- 調査手法
- 治療
- 外科的処置、手術
- 酵素
- 酵素と補酵素
- 放射線療法
- 定位技術
- 脳神経外科手術
- トランスフェーゼ
- アルキルおよびアリールトランスフェラーゼ
- 放射線手術
- スペルミンシンターゼ
その他の研究ID番号
- 16-305
個々の参加者データ (IPD) の計画
個々の参加者データ (IPD) を共有する予定はありますか?
医薬品およびデバイス情報、研究文書
米国FDA規制医薬品の研究
米国FDA規制機器製品の研究
米国で製造され、米国から輸出された製品。
この情報は、Web サイト clinicaltrials.gov から変更なしで直接取得したものです。研究の詳細を変更、削除、または更新するリクエストがある場合は、register@clinicaltrials.gov。 までご連絡ください。 clinicaltrials.gov に変更が加えられるとすぐに、ウェブサイトでも自動的に更新されます。