Trial Outcomes & Findings for Open-Label Phase 2 Efficacy Trial of Cancer Macrobeads in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Pancreatic/Colorectal Cancer (NCT NCT01053013)
NCT ID: NCT01053013
Last Updated: 2021-05-12
Results Overview
The primary efficacy outcome is post-implantation all-cause mortality, where time to death is defined as the time from the most recent scan prior to first implantation (time of origin, To) to death from any cause.
COMPLETED
PHASE2
58 participants
From date of the most recent scan (disease progression) prior to the first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
2021-05-12
Participant Flow
Participants were recruited based on physician referral between April 2010 and February 2016. The first participant was implanted on April 15, 2010 (pancreatic) and May 14, 2010 (mCRC). The last implantation was on March 4, 2016 (pancreatic) and October 18, 2013 (mCRC).
90 participants provided informed consent to participate in the study (Pancreatic cancer n=34; mCRC n=46). Of these, 24 pancreatic cancer patients and 34 mCRC patients were enrolled in the study. The 22 patients who were not enrolled into the study, after providing consent, had failed the respective eligibility criteria (n=19) or decided not to enroll in the study (n=3).
Participant milestones
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
|---|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
24
|
34
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
24
|
34
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
0
|
0
|
Reasons for withdrawal
Withdrawal data not reported
Baseline Characteristics
Open-Label Phase 2 Efficacy Trial of Cancer Macrobeads in Patients With Treatment-Resistant Pancreatic/Colorectal Cancer
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Total
n=58 Participants
Total of all reporting groups
|
|---|---|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
60.25 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 12.37 • n=5 Participants
|
58.00 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.11 • n=7 Participants
|
58.93 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 11.05 • n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
23 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
31 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
16 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
11 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
27 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
White
|
22 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
27 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
49 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Black
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
4 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
5 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Hispanic
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Asian
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
2 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Native American
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
|
Race/Ethnicity, Customized
Other
|
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=7 Participants
|
1 Participants
n=5 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: From date of the most recent scan (disease progression) prior to the first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.Population: Participants who received at least one RENCA macrobead implant.
The primary efficacy outcome is post-implantation all-cause mortality, where time to death is defined as the time from the most recent scan prior to first implantation (time of origin, To) to death from any cause.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Survival - Based on Most Recent Scan
|
4.66 months
Interval 2.43 to 5.74
|
7.7 months
Interval 6.1 to 12.2
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: From date of the first RENCA macrobead implant; assessed up to 32 months.Population: Participants who received at least one RENCA macrobead implant.
The secondary efficacy objective was to evaluate overall survival calculated using the time from first RENCA macrobead implantation to death from any cause.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Survival - Based on 1st Implant
|
4.3 months
Interval 2.03 to 5.18
|
7.3 months
Interval 5.4 to 11.4
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: From date of Stage IV disease diagnosis up to 126 months; up to 32 months from first RENCA macrobead implant.Population: Participants who received at least one RENCA macrobead implant.
The secondary efficacy objective was to evaluate overall survival calculated using the time from Stage IV disease diagnosis to death from any cause.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Overall Survival - Based on Stage IV Disease Diagnosis
|
15.7 months
Interval 11.97 to 18.89
|
32.1 months
Interval 27.2 to 43.2
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline vs. Day 90 post-Implant 1Population: mCRC participants who had received at least one macrobead implant and for whom baseline PET-CT scan and day 90 post-Implant 1 PET-CT scan data were available. n=26 subjects; 77 lesions evaluated. No formal analysis was performed on the pancreatic cancer cohort as a meaningful analysis was limited based on the small group size with baseline and day 90 scans.
Tumors were assessed by positron emission tomography (PET)-CT scan at baseline and day 90 following the first RENCA macrobead implantation. The use of \[13\]F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) uptake for the detection of lesions \>1 cm in diameter allowed evaluation of metabolic activity. Decreases in FDG uptake were indicative of metabolic suppression of the tumor. The use of PET-CT scanning indicated anatomical localization, approximate size/volume of primary tumor and metastatic lesion(s), and assessment of metabolic activity of the tumor (as an indicator of metabolic health and necrosis). Disease state is reported as a function of Tumor measurement divided by SUVmax. Changes were assessed between day 90 post RENCA macrobead implant and baseline values. Patients with no change = stable; patients with decreased values = decreased/necrosis, and patients with increased values = increased.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=87 lesions
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=87 lesions
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=87 lesions
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Necrosis Comparison of Tumors Using PET-CT Scan
|
15 lesions
|
42 lesions
|
30 lesions
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Change from baseline up to and including day 30 post-Implant 1Population: Participants with mCRC receiving at least one RENCA macrobead implantation.
Tumor markers included serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cancer antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), and were assessed on all participants with mCRC at baseline and at subsequent evaluation points to further assess tumor response to RENCA macrobead implantation. A tumor marker response was defined as a greater than or equal to 20% decrease in one or both of CEA or CA 19-9.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=34 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=34 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=34 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tumor Marker Response of mCRC Participants
|
7 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
15 Participants
|
9 Participants
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Change from baseline up to and including day 30 post-Implant 1.Population: Participants with pancreatic cancer receiving at least one RENCA macrobead implantation.
Tumor markers included serum carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and cancer antigen 19-9 (CA 19-9), and were assessed on all participants with pancreatic cancer at baseline and at subsequent evaluation points to further assess tumor response to RENCA macrobead implantation. A tumor marker response was defined as a greater than or equal to 20% decrease in one or both of CEA or CA 19-9.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=24 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=24 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=24 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tumor Marker Response of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
3 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
14 Participants
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
C-reactive protein (CRP) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. CRP levels were assessed as a marker of systemic inflammatory processes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=34 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=30 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=12 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=11 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
C-reactive Protein Levels in mCRC Participants
|
3.1 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 4.2
|
19.3 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 8.1
|
8.9 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 5.9
|
6.7 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 6.9
|
10.2 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 23.6
|
23.5 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 50.8
|
11.4 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 8.3
|
5.5 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 4.1
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 implant and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
C-reactive protein (CRP) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. CRP levels were assessed as a marker of systemic inflammatory processes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=21 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=20 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=15 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
C-Reactive Protein Levels in Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
1.7 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 2.0
|
30.7 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 46.7
|
13.8 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 22.9
|
6.7 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 11.6
|
1.4 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 1.3
|
3.1 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 1.7
|
89.8 mg/dL
Standard Deviation 148.4
|
7.52 mg/dL
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. ESR was assessed as a marker of systemic inflammatory processes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=34 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=32 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=30 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=12 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate in mCRC Participants
|
44.9 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 30.9
|
92.7 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 31.4
|
85.8 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 37.3
|
68.1 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 39.6
|
53.5 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 16.1
|
93.3 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 27.7
|
92.7 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 23.1
|
74.9 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 28.8
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 implant and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. ESR was assessed as a marker of systemic inflammatory processes.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=23 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=18 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=18 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=11 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate in Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
33 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 24.6
|
51.9 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 31.3
|
49.2 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 12.9
|
78.6 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 13.8
|
83.3 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 5.8
|
90.0 mm/hr
Standard Deviation 14.1
|
80.0 mm/hr
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Cancer Antigen 125 (CA 125) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. CA 125 was used to monitor more localized intra-abdominal/peritoneal inflammatory processes related to the placement of the RENCA macrobeads or, in some cases, the intraperitoneal spread of tumor.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=33 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=34 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=30 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=12 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=11 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cancer Antigen 125 Levels in mCRC Participants
|
43.5 U/mL
Standard Deviation 76.65
|
95.5 U/mL
Standard Deviation 73.5
|
83.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 86.6
|
67.6 U/mL
Standard Deviation 106.1
|
39.2 U/mL
Standard Deviation 49.1
|
63.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 29.1
|
48.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 31.4
|
38.0 U/mL
Standard Deviation 31.9
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1 and Day 0, 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2 (when applicable).Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 implant and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Cancer Antigen 125 (CA 125) is one of three inflammatory markers assessed during this study. CA 125 was used to monitor more localized intra-abdominal/peritoneal inflammatory processes related to the placement of the RENCA macrobeads or, in some cases, the intraperitoneal spread of tumor.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=23 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=21 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=20 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=15 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cancer Antigen 125 Levels in Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
147.9 U/mL
Standard Deviation 278.6
|
300.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 410.6
|
409.4 U/mL
Standard Deviation 607.0
|
291.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 289.2
|
49.7 U/mL
Standard Deviation 30.1
|
88.5 U/mL
Standard Deviation 7.8
|
117.0 U/mL
Standard Deviation 46.7
|
57.0 U/mL
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant (day 0 to day 60): Participants with mCRC who received at least one RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (day 0 to day 60): Participants who received at least two RENCA macrobead implantations.
The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance scale is a 5-point scale, where 0 denotes perfect health and 5 is death. It is used by clinicians to assess disease progression and how the disease is affecting the daily living abilities of the patient. The ECOG Performance Status scores are defined as follows: 0: Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction. 1. Restricted in physical strenuous activity, but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (e.g. light house work, office work). 2. Ambulatory and capable of all self-care, but unable to carry out any work activities, up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair 50% or more of waking hours. 4. Completely disabled, cannot carry on any self-care, totally confined to bed or chair. 5. Death
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=28 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=25 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=24 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=24 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=12 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=6 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 1
|
15 Participants
|
15 Participants
|
16 Participants
|
10 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 4
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 0
|
13 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 2
|
0 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
6 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 3
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of mCRC Participants
ECOG Score 5
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance scale is a 5-point scale, where 0 denotes perfect health and 5 is death. It is used by clinicians to assess disease progression and how the disease is affecting the daily living abilities of the patient. The ECOG Performance Status scores are defined as follows: 0: Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease activities without restriction. 1. Restricted in physical strenuous activity, but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (e.g. light house work, office work). 2. Ambulatory and capable of all self-care, but unable to carry out any work activities, up and about more than 50% of waking hours. 3. Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair 50% or more of waking hours. 4. Completely disabled, cannot carry on any self-care, totally confined to bed or chair. 5. Death
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=23 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=20 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=16 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=12 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 3
|
0 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 5
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 0
|
11 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
3 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 1
|
7 Participants
|
11 Participants
|
8 Participants
|
4 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
—
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 2
|
5 Participants
|
7 Participants
|
5 Participants
|
2 Participants
|
1 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
|
Performance Status (ECOG Score) of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
ECOG Score 4
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
0 Participants
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 Post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) is a self-rated scale that measures the participant's ability to perform daily functions, ranging from 0 ("dead") to 100 ("normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease). Karnofsky scores are defined as follows: 100: Normal; no complaints; no evidence of disease 90: Able to carry on normal activity with effort, minor sign or symptoms of disease 80: Normal activity with effort; some sign or symptoms of disease 70: Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity or do active work 60: Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care for most personal needs 50: Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care 40: Disabled; requires special care and assistance 30: Severely disabled; hospitalization is indicated, although death is not imminent 20: Very sick; hospitalization/active support treatment is necessary 10: Moribund; fatal processes progressively worsening 0: Dead
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=32 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=26 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=27 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=28 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=8 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=11 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Activities of Daily Living (KPS Score) of mCRC Participants
|
90.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 7.2
|
81.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.8
|
80.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.6
|
74.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.6
|
84.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.1
|
76.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.9
|
82.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.1
|
76.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.5
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) is a self-rated scale that measures the participant's ability to perform daily functions, ranging from 0 ("dead") to 100 ("normal, no complaints, no evidence of disease). Karnofsky scores are defined as follows: 100: Normal; no complaints; no evidence of disease 90: Able to carry on normal activity with effort, minor sign or symptoms of disease 80: Normal activity with effort; some sign or symptoms of disease 70: Cares for self; unable to carry on normal activity or do active work 60: Requires occasional assistance, but is able to care for most personal needs 50: Requires considerable assistance and frequent medical care 40: Disabled; requires special care and assistance 30: Severely disabled; hospitalization is indicated, although death is not imminent 20: Very sick; hospitalization/active support treatment is necessary 10: Moribund; fatal processes progressively worsening 0: Dead
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=19 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=14 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=11 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Activities of Daily Living (KPS Score) for Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
87.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.3
|
79.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.7
|
78.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 12.9
|
78.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 13.8
|
83.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 5.8
|
90.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.1
|
80.0 score on a scale
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales, three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. The Global Health Status is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 29 and 30), whose response score ranges on a 7 point scale. The score for physical function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, excellent). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=32 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=25 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=26 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=26 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=7 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Global Health Status of mCRC Participants
|
94.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 8.4
|
78.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.9
|
80.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.3
|
75.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.9
|
86.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.4
|
78.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.6
|
86.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 9.5
|
83.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.7
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation and were screened as indicated; Implant 2 (Days 0-60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations and were screened as indicated. In some cases, participants may not have had all assessments conducted as scheduled. In those incidents, the number of participants analyzed has been adjusted to include only those participants for which data was available.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales, three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. The Global Health Status is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 29 and 30), whose response score ranges on a 7 point scale. The score for physical function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, excellent). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=16 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=14 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=10 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Global Health Status of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
90.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.8
|
75.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.8
|
77.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 15.9
|
72.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.3
|
84.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 4.6
|
26.5 score on a scale
|
25.6 score on a scale
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including physical function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Physical Function is assessed from 5 of the 30 questions (Questions 1-5), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for physical function is calculated based on the average score from these 5 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=32 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=30 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=28 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Physical Function of mCRC Participants
|
86.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.2
|
69.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 26.9
|
66.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.4
|
78.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.8
|
66.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.5
|
63.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 35.0
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including physical function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Physical Function is assessed from 5 of the 30 questions (Questions 1-5), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for physical function is calculated based on the average score from these 5 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=19 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=13 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=3 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Physical Function of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
81.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.6
|
62.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 28.5
|
64.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 33.7
|
91.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 10.2
|
76.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.6
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including role function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Role Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Questions 6 and 7), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=32 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=30 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=28 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Role Function of mCRC Participants
|
85.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.5
|
58.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 29.3
|
56.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 36.9
|
75.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 32.4
|
55.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 36.9
|
51.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 32.8
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with pancreatic cancer who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with pancreatic cancer who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including role function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Role Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Questions 6 and 7), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=19 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=13 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=3 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Role Function of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
80.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.2
|
58.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 32.3
|
52.6 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 36.5
|
83.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.7
|
50.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 23.6
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including emotional function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Emotional Function is assessed from 4 of the 30 questions (Questions 21-24), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 4 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=30 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=27 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Emotional Function of mCRC Participants
|
83.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.5
|
78.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.4
|
74.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.2
|
84.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 16.8
|
75.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.3
|
75.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 17.4
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including emotional function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Emotional Function is assessed from 4 of the 30 questions (Questions 21-24), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 4 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=18 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=13 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=3 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Emotional Function of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
82.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 20.3
|
70.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.9
|
69.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 32.9
|
91.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 14.4
|
83.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 11.8
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including cognitive function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Cognitive Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 20 and 25), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=30 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=27 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cognitive Function of mCRC Participants
|
86.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.5
|
84.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.0
|
82.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 25.3
|
79.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.7
|
71.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.9
|
72.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.0
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including cognitive function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Cognitive Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 20 and 25), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=18 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=13 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Cognitive Function of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
87.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 18.6
|
72.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 39.2
|
73.1 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 36.3
|
79.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 22.7
|
71.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 24.9
|
72.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.0
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including social function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Social Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 26 and 27), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=33 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=30 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=27 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=13 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=9 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Function of mCRC Participants
|
82.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 21.8
|
67.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.5
|
59.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 36.5
|
70.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.3
|
60.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 27.4
|
53.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 35.1
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations.
The European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30, version 3.0) consists of 30 questions which pertain to: five functional scales (including social function), three symptom scales, a global health status score, and six single items. Social Function is assessed from 2 of the 30 questions (Question 26 and 27), whose response score ranges on a 4 point scale. The score for role function is calculated based on the average score from these 2 questions. A linear transformation is used to standardize these responses. Using this linear transformation, the minimum value is 0 (worst outcome, poor functionality) and the maximum value is 100 (best outcome, better functionality). Therefore, increasing values indicate better outcome and decreasing values indicate worse outcome.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=24 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=17 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=13 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=3 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Social Function of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
76.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 31.1
|
58.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 30.1
|
61.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 33.6
|
77.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 19.2
|
50.0 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 0.0
|
—
|
—
|
—
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 1 RENCA macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Participants with mCRC who had received at least 2 RENCA macrobead implantations.
Participants were asked to rate their pain on a discrete scale (from 0 = "no pain" to 10 "worst pain imaginable, unbearable"). The worst pain at each time point was used in the analysis.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=28 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=24 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=26 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=24 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=13 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=7 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=11 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
n=10 Participants
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Pain Assessment of mCRC Participants
|
1.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.7
|
3.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.0
|
2.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
3.8 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.7
|
2.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.8
|
5.4 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.2
|
4.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.0
|
4.2 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.6
|
OTHER_PRE_SPECIFIED outcome
Timeframe: Baseline; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 1; Day 14, 30, 60 post-Implant 2Population: Implant 1 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 1 macrobead implantation; Implant 2 (Day 0 to Day 60): Pancreatic cancer participants who had received at least 2 macrobead implantations.
Participants were asked to rate their pain on a discrete scale (from 0 = "no pain" to 10 "worst pain imaginable, unbearable"). The worst pain at each time point was used in the analysis.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
Pancreatic Cancer
n=23 Participants
Pancreatic cancer patients will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA Macrobeads.
|
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
n=17 Participants
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who will undergo up to 4 implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
RENCA macrobeads
|
Increased
n=15 Participants
mCRC participants with increased SUVmax, tumor measurement based on imaging results.
|
mCRC: Non-responder
n=10 Participants
Participants with mCRC whose tumor marker response (serum level of CEA and/or CA 19-9) did not decrease by greater than or equal to 20% of baseline value.
|
Implant 2: Day 0
n=3 Participants
CRP levels at day 0 of second implantation (day 90 following first implantation).
|
Implant 2: Day 14
n=1 Participants
CRP levels at day 14 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 30
n=2 Participants
CRP levels at day 30 after second implantation.
|
Implant 2: Day 60
CRP levels at day 60 after second implantation.
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Pain Assessment of Pancreatic Cancer Participants
|
1.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.1
|
2.3 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.2
|
2.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.5
|
3.9 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 2.4
|
5.5 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 3.0
|
4.0 score on a scale
|
3.7 score on a scale
Standard Deviation 1.8
|
—
|
Adverse Events
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Participants
Pancreatic Cancer Participants
Serious adverse events
| Measure |
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Participants
n=34 participants at risk
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who underwent at least 1 (and up to 4) implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
|
Pancreatic Cancer Participants
n=24 participants at risk
Pancreatic cancer patients who underwent at least 1 (and up to 3) implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Cardiac disorders
Atrial fibrillation
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Cardio-respiratory arrest
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Myocardial ischaemia
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Adominal pain
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
20.8%
5/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Ascites
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Vomiting
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal distension
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Intestinal obstruction
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Colitis
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarrhoea
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastrointestinal haemorrhage
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Melaena
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Small intestinal obstruction
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Disease progression
|
70.6%
24/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
54.2%
13/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Asthenia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Hernia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Pain
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Chest pain
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Drug intolerance
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Fatigue
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Inflammation
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Bile duct obstruction
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Hepatic Failure
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Abdominal ascites
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Clostridium difficile colitis
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Liver abscess
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pelvic abscess
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Peritoneal abscess
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Sepsis
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Septic shock
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Staphylococcal bacteraemia
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urosepsis
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Fall
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Upper limb fracture
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Cardiac enzymes increased
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Troponin increased
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
White blood cell count increased
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Dehydration
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Anorexia
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Decreased appetite
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Muscular weakness
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Malignant ascites
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Malignant neoplasm of paraurethral glands
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps)
Metastases to central nervous system
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Cerebrovascular accident
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Hydronephrosis
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Haematuria
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Renal failure acute
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Urethral obstruction
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Dyspnoea
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pleural effusion
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Cough
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pulmonary embolism
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Respiratory failure
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Deep vein thrombosis
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hypotension
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Inferior vena caval occlusion
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
Other adverse events
| Measure |
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (mCRC) Participants
n=34 participants at risk
Metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients who underwent at least 1 (and up to 4) implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
|
Pancreatic Cancer Participants
n=24 participants at risk
Pancreatic cancer patients who underwent at least 1 (and up to 3) implantations of RENCA macrobeads (no less than 3 months apart), at a dosage level of 8 RENCA macrobeads per kilogram of body weight.
|
|---|---|---|
|
Blood and lymphatic system disorders
Anaemia
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Blood and lymphatic system disorders
Leukocytosis
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Blood and lymphatic system disorders
Lymphadenopathy
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Cardiac disorders
Tachycardia
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain
|
67.6%
23/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
45.8%
11/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Constipation
|
44.1%
15/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
58.3%
14/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Nausea
|
55.9%
19/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
41.7%
10/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal distension
|
35.3%
12/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Vomiting
|
41.2%
14/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Diarroea
|
32.4%
11/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Ascites
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Flatulance
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain discomfort
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain lower
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal tenderness
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Dyspepsia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Small intestinal obstruction
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Gastroesophageal reflux disease
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Haematochezia
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Retching
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal pain upper
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Abdominal rigidity
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Dry mouth
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Dysphagia
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Gastrointestinal disorders
Faeces discoloured
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Fatigue
|
73.5%
25/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
62.5%
15/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Disease progression
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Pyrexia
|
67.6%
23/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Asthenia
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Oedema peripheral
|
23.5%
8/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Pain
|
23.5%
8/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Chills
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
20.8%
5/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Chest pain
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Gait disturbance
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Malaise
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
General disorders
Influenza like illness
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Jaundice
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Hepatobiliary disorders
Hepatomegaly
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Urinary tract infection
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Pneumonia
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Oral candidiasis
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Bronchitis
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Nasopharyngitis
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Rhinitis
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Infections and infestations
Upper respiratory tract infection
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Procedural pain
|
32.4%
11/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Incision site pain
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
33.3%
8/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Injury, poisoning and procedural complications
Incision site complication
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Gamma-glutamyltransferase increased
|
52.9%
18/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
29.2%
7/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood alkaline phosphatase increased
|
47.1%
16/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
29.2%
7/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Haemoglobin decreased
|
38.2%
13/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
33.3%
8/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Weight decreased
|
38.2%
13/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
33.3%
8/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood albumin decreased
|
41.2%
14/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood calcium decreased
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood glucose increased
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Aspratate aminotransferase increased
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood sodium increased
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Alanine aminotransferase increased
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood bilirubin increased
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Body temperature increased
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood creatinine increased
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood potassium increased
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Blood pressure increased
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Lipase increased
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Investigations
Weight increased
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Decreased appetite
|
50.0%
17/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Anorexia
|
35.3%
12/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Dehydration
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Hypoalbuminaemia
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Hyponatraemia
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Hypokalaemia
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Cachexia
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Metabolism and nutrition disorders
Malnutrition
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Back pain
|
32.4%
11/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Musculoskeletal pain
|
29.4%
10/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Pain in extremity
|
23.5%
8/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Arthralgia
|
17.6%
6/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Joint swelling
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Muscular weakness
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Myalgia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Groin pain
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders
Muscle spasms
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dizziness
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Headache
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Hypoaethesia
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Neuropathy
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Amnesia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dysarthria
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Dysgeusia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Lethargy
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Nervous system disorders
Speech disorder
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Anxiety
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
37.5%
9/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Depression
|
20.6%
7/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
25.0%
6/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Insomnia
|
23.5%
8/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
20.8%
5/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Psychiatric disorders
Confusional state
|
0.00%
0/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Dysuria
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Pollakiuria
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Chromaturia
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Renal and urinary disorders
Micturition urgency
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Dyspnoea
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Cough
|
23.5%
8/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
16.7%
4/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Dyspnoea exertional
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Hiccups
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Painful respiration
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders
Pharyngolaryngeal pain
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Hyperhidrosis
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
29.2%
7/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Rash
|
26.5%
9/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Night sweats
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
29.2%
7/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Pruritus
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Rash pruritic
|
11.8%
4/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Urticaria
|
14.7%
5/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Skin discolouration
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders
Erythema
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hypotension
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
12.5%
3/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Deep vein thrombosis
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hot flush
|
2.9%
1/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
8.3%
2/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Hypertension
|
8.8%
3/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Lymphoedema
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
4.2%
1/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
|
Vascular disorders
Flushing
|
5.9%
2/34 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
0.00%
0/24 • From date of first macrobead implantation; assessed up to 32 months.
The NCI CTCAE was used to standardize the terminology and grade the severity of reported adverse events. The Principal and Sub-Investigators, and Attending Physicians, were responsible for monitoring adverse events and the safety of all participants. The Data Safety Monitoring Board, independently and in collaboration with the PIs, monitored and reviewed all safety findings, including study status, serious adverse events, AEs \> Grade 2, laboratory values of special interest and subject deaths.
|
Additional Information
Betty-Jane Sloan, Clinical Research Manager
The Rogosin Institute
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee Sponsor retains the first right for scientific disclosure of study results. PI may draft a study results disclosure for scientific publication following the earlier of sponsor's disclosure or 12 months after study completion at all sites. Sponsor has 60 days to review PI's draft for patentable subject matter or confidential information. PI will delete any confidential information and delay any disclosure for another 60 days for sponsor to secure proprietary protection.
- Publication restrictions are in place
Restriction type: OTHER