Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34645411›Full record

ArticleBMC cancer2021

The PRO-ACTIVE trial protocol: a randomized study comparing the effectiveness of PROphylACTic swallow InterVEntion for patients receiving radiotherapy for head and neck cancer.

R Martino, M I Fitch, C D Fuller, A Hope, G Krisciunas, S E Langmore, C Lazarus, C L Macdonald, T McCulloch, G Mills and 7 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial Protocol
In one paragraph

Article in BMC cancer, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03455608 (PRO-ACTIVE), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT03455608 nacompletednot on this map

PRO-ACTIVE: Comparing The Effectiveness of Prophylactic Swallow Intervention for Patients Receiving Radiotherapy for Head and Neck Cancer

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity Health Network, TorontoRan2018 to 2024Enrolled952ConditionsDysphagiaArmsRE-ACTIVE, PRO-ACTIVE EAT, PRO-ACTIVE EAT + EXERCISE
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Dysphagia Advances in Head and Neck Cancer.Current otorhinolaryngology reports · 2023
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

17 authors.

R MartinoDepartment of Speech Language Pathology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada. rosemary.martino@utoronto.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3298-7714
M I FitchBloomberg Faculty of Nursing, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
C D FullerDivision of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave, Houston, TX, TX 77030, USA.
A HopeDepartment of Radiation Oncology, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
G KrisciunasDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, USA.
S E LangmoreDepartment of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, USA.
C LazarusDepartment of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, Mount Sinai Beth Israel, New York, NY, USA.
C L MacdonaldQualitative Health Research Consultants, Madison, WI, USA.
T McCullochDepartment of Surgery, Division of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, U.S.A.
G MillsDepartment of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
D A PalmaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
K PytyniaDepartment of Head & Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave, Houston, TX, TX 77030, USA.
J RingashDepartment of Otolaryngology, University of Toronto, 160-500 University Ave, Toronto, Ontario, M5G 1V7, Canada.
K SultanemDepartment of Radiation Oncology, McGill University, Montreal, QC, Canada.
J TheurerSchool of Communication Sciences and Disorders, Western University, London, ON, Canada.
K E ThorpeDalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
K HutchesonDivision of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, 7007 Bertner Ave, Houston, TX, TX 77030, USA. KArnold@mdanderson.org.

Funding

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute PCS-1609-36195
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSwallowing therapy is commonly provided as a treatment to lessen the risk or severity of dysphagia secondary to radiotherapy (RT) for head and neck cancer (HNC); however, best practice is not yet established. This trial will compare the effectiveness of prophylactic (high and low intensity) versus reactive interventions for swallowing in patients with HNC undergoing RT.

methodsThis multi-site, international randomized clinical trial (RCT) will include 952 adult patients receiving radiotherapy for HNC and who are at high risk for post-RT dysphagia. Participants will be randomized to receive one of three interventions for swallowing during RT: RE-ACTIVE, started promptly if/when dysphagia is identified; PRO-ACTIVE EAT, low intensity prophylactic intervention started before RT commences; or, PRO-ACTIVE EAT+EXERCISE, high intensity prophylactic intervention also started before RT commences. We hypothesize that the PRO-ACTIVE therapies are more effective than late RE-ACTIVE therapy; and, that the more intensive PRO-ACTIVE (EAT + EXERCISE) is superior to the low intensive PRO-ACTIVE (EAT). The primary endpoint of effectiveness is duration of feeding tube dependency one year post radiation therapy, selected as a pragmatic outcome valued equally by diverse stakeholders (e.g., patients, caregivers and clinicians). Secondary outcomes will include objective measures of swallow physiology and function, pneumonia and weight loss, along with various patient-reported swallowing-related outcomes, such as quality of life, symptom burden, and self-efficacy. DISCUSSION: Dysphagia is a common and potentially life-threatening chronic toxicity of radiotherapy, and a priority issue for HNC survivors. Yet, the optimal timing and intensity of swallowing therapy provided by a speech-language pathologist is not known. With no clearly preferred strategy, current practice is fraught with substantial variation. The pragmatic PRO-ACTIVE trial aims to specifically address the decisional dilemma of when swallowing therapy should begin (i.e., before or after a swallowing problem develops). The critical impact of this dilemma is heightened by the growing number of young HNC patients in healthcare systems that need to allocate resources most effectively. The results of the PRO-ACTIVE trial will address the global uncertainty regarding best practice for dysphagia management in HNC patients receiving radiotherapy.

trial registrationThe protocol is registered with the US Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute, and the PRO-ACTIVE trial was prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov , under the identifier NCT03455608 ; First posted: Mar 6, 2018; Last verified: Jun 17, 2021. Protocol Version: 1.3 (January 27, 2020).

Indexed as

DeglutitionDeglutition DisordersHead and Neck NeoplasmsRadiation InjuriesAdultDecision MakingEnteral NutritionHumansMulticenter Studies as TopicPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresPragmatic Clinical Trials as TopicQuality of LifeRadiation PneumonitisRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicSelf EfficacySingle-Blind MethodDysphagiaFeeding tube durationHead and neck cancer survivorsInterventionProphylacticReactive

Identifiers

PMID34645411
PMCPMC8513207

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.