ClinicalTrials.gov
public full text
Public Domain
TPC Versus GP Induction Chemotherapy for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma
The NCCN guidelines recommend induction chemotherapy followed by concurrent chemoradiotherapy as the standard treatment for locoregionally advanced nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC). However, meta-analyses have shown significant survival differences between different induction chemotherapy regimens. How to choose an induction chemotherapy regimen and treatment course that ensures definitive therapeutic effects and low incidence of toxic side effects remains a hot spot in clinical research. Polymeric micellar paclitaxel are an innovative form of paclitaxel drugs, with high penetration and long retention effects, which can enter the vascularly disordered tumor microenvironment through passive targeting and form higher concentrations in tumor tissue. It remains to be investigated whether the TPC (paclitaxel, cisplatin and capecitabine) regimen based on polymeric micellar paclitaxel compared to the current standard first-line induction chemotherapy GP (gemcitabine, cisplatin) regimen can further improve therapeutic effects in high-risk patients with locally advanced disease. There is still a lack of head-to-head studies for comparison. This study aims to compare, through a prospective, parallel-controlled, randomized, open-label, multicenter phase II clinical trial, the TPC induction chemotherapy vs. the GP induction chemotherapy combined with concurrent chemoradiotherapy for the treatment of high-risk locoregionally advanced NPC (T4 or N2-3) in terms of 2-year progression-free survival, overall survival, overall response rate, toxic side effects, etc.
Conceptio Open Archive
Analyze & explore related research in Conceptio
Connect this record directly into your research workflow or AI agent. Explore citations across open repositories, query full text, and export structured proof bundles.
This document is indexed with metadata only: full text is not available in the archive for this record. Open the official source ↗
Related documents
- Carboplatin and Paclitaxel With or Without Bevacizumab Compared to Docetaxel, Carboplatin, and Paclitaxel in Treating Patients With Stage II, Stage III, or Stage IV Ovarian Epithelial, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cavity Carcinoma (Cancer)#969704
- Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in Treating Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer That Has Not Responded to Hormone Therapy#900710
- Induction Chemotherapy Followed by IMRT or Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy in Locoregionally Advanced Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma#838862
- mFOLFIRI as the Second Line Chemotherapy for Advanced Esophageal Carcinoma After Failure of 1st Line Treatment of Paclitaxel/DDP : a Phase II Single Center Prospective Clinical Trial#845525
- Two Different Schedules of Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, Gemcitabine, and Surgery in Treating Patients With Newly Diagnosed Stage IIIC or Stage IV Primary Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, Fallopian Tube Cancer, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer#1173287
Record · ID 1451848
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Retrieved via Conceptio: every document is proof-bundled with source, license, and retrieval metadata.
Bring this data into your agent: Connect via MCP or API · 20 free credits to start · no card required
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive
Read the Docs → · View CLI source on GitHub · Conceptio Open Knowledge Archive