4.6 Article

Protocol for a multicentre, prospective observational study of elective neck dissection for clinically node-negative oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (END-TC study)

期刊

BMJ OPEN
卷 12, 期 9, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-059615

关键词

Head & neck surgery; ORAL & MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY; ONCOLOGY

资金

  1. Japan Society for the Promotion of Science [18K09818, 21K10098]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of END in clinically node-negative OTSCC patients and its impact on the quality of life.
Introduction In early-stage oral tongue squamous cell carcinoma (OTSCC), elective neck dissection (END) is recommended when occult lymph node metastasis is suspected; however, there is no unanimous consensus on the risks and benefits of END in such cases. The management of clinically node-negative (cN0) OTSCC remains controversial. This study, therefore, aimed to evaluate the efficacy of END and its impact on the quality of life (QoL) of patients with cN0 OTSCC. Methods and analysis This is a prospective, multicentre, nonrandomised observational study. The choice of whether to perform END at the same time as resection of the primary tumour is based on institutional policy and patient preference. The primary endpoint of this study is 3-year overall survival. The secondary endpoints are 3-year disease-specific survival, 3-year relapse-free survival and the impact on patient QoL. Propensity score-matching analysis will be performed to reduce selection bias. Ethics and dissemination This study was approved by the Clinical Research Review Board of the Nagasaki University. The protocol of this study was registered at the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry. The datasets generated during the current study will be available from the corresponding author on reasonable request. The results will be disseminated internationally, through scientific and professional conferences and in peer-reviewed medical journals.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据