Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38362466›Full record

ArticleClinical and translational radiation oncology2024

Randomized phase II selection trial of FLASH and conventional radiotherapy for patients with localized cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma or basal cell carcinoma: A study protocol.

Rémy Kinj, Olivier Gaide, Wendy Jeanneret-Sozzi, Urania Dafni, Stéphanie Viguet-Carrin, Enea Sagittario, Magdalini Kypriotou, Julie Chenal, Frederic Duclos, Marine Hebeisen and 5 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Clinical and translational radiation oncology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05724875 (Randomized Phase II Selection Trial of FLASH Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Patients With Localized Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma or Basal Cell Carcinoma), which is not on this map. Cited by 31 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
10.8field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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.

NCT05724875 naactive not recruitingnot on this map

Randomized Phase II Selection Trial of FLASH Versus Conventional Radiotherapy for Patients With Localized Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma or Basal Cell Carcinoma

TypeinterventionalSponsorCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisRan2023 to 2026Enrolled60ConditionsBasal Cell Carcinoma, Cutaneous Squamous Cell CarcinomaArmsFLASH RT, Conventional RT
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Development and application ofPhysics and imaging in radiation oncology · 2026
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Microenvironmental remodeling in FLASH radiotherapy.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2026
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. A Feasibility Study of Preclinical Ocular X-Ray FLASH Radiation Therapy.International journal of radiation oncology, biology, physics · 2025
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

15 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Rémy KinjDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Olivier GaideService of Dermatology, CHUV, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Wendy Jeanneret-SozziDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Urania DafniLaboratory of Biostatistics School of Health Sciences University of Athens, Greece.
Stéphanie Viguet-CarrinCenter of Experimental Therapeutics (CTE), Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Enea SagittarioCenter of Experimental Therapeutics (CTE), Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Magdalini KypriotouCenter of Experimental Therapeutics (CTE), Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Julie ChenalCenter of Experimental Therapeutics (CTE), Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Frederic DuclosDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Marine HebeisenDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Teresa FalcoDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Reiner GeyerInstitute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Patrik Gonçalves JorgeInstitute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Raphaël MoeckliInstitute of Radiation Physics, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Jean BourhisDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, CHUV, Rue du Bugnon 46, CH-1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
University of Lausanne · CHNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Cutaneous basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) are the most prevalent skin cancers in western countries. Surgery is the standard of care for these cancers and conventional external radiotherapy (CONV-RT) with conventional dose rate (0.03-0.06 Gy/sec) represents a good alternative when the patients or tumors are not amenable to surgery but routinely generates skin side effects. Low energy electron FLASH radiotherapy (FLASH-RT) is a new form of radiotherapy exploiting the biological advantage of the FLASH effect, which consists in delivering radiation dose in milliseconds instead of minutes in CONV-RT. In pre-clinical studies, when compared to CONV-RT, FLASH-RT induced a robust, reproducible and remarkable sparing of the normal healthy tissues, while the efficacy on tumors was preserved. In this context, we aim to prospectively evaluate FLASH-RT versus CONV-RT with regards to toxicity and oncological outcome in localized cutaneous BCC and SCC. Methods: This is a randomized selection, non-comparative, phase II study of curative FLASH-RT versus CONV-RT in patients with T1-T2 N0 M0 cutaneous BCC and SCC. Patients will be randomly allocated to low energy electron FLASH-RT (dose rate: 220-270 Gy/s) or to CONV-RT arm. Small lesions (T1) will receive a single dose of 22 Gy and large lesions (T2) will receive 30 Gy in 5 fractions of 6 Gy over two weeks.The primary endpoint evaluates safety at 6 weeks after RT through grade ≥ 3 toxicity and efficacy through local control rate at 12 months. Approximately 60 patients in total will be randomized, considering on average 1-2 lesions and a maximum of 3 lesions per patients corresponding to the total of 96 lesions required. FLASH-RT will be performed using the Mobetron® (IntraOp, USA) with high dose rate functionality.LANCE (NCT05724875) is the first randomized trial evaluating FLASH-RT and CONV-RT in a curative setting.

Indexed as

Basal cell carcinomaFLASH radiotherapySkin cancerSquamous cell carcinomaUltra high dose rate

Identifiers

PMID38362466
PMCPMC10867306
OpenAlexW4391650204

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.