thymine has been researched along with Disease Exacerbation in 21 studies
| Excerpt | Relevance | Reference |
|---|---|---|
| "Direct randomized comparisons of regorafenib, TAS-102, and fruquintinib for treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are lacking." | 9.05 | Regorafenib, TAS-102, or fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer: any difference in randomized trials? ( Li, J; Peng, Z; Shen, L; Wang, Q; Wang, X; Zhang, Q, 2020) |
| "The standard first- and second- line chemotherapy backbone regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based with addition of irinotecan or oxaliplatin." | 7.96 | Review of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment pathways and early clinical experience of trifluridine/tipiracil in the UK named patient programme. ( Carter, AM; Iveson, T; Mullamitha, S; Shiu, KK; Spooner, C; Stevens, D, 2020) |
| "To assess whether the size of the cytosine-thymine-guanine (CTG) expansion mutation in myotonic dystrophy predicts progression of conduction system disease and cardiac events." | 7.71 | Does cytosine-thymine-guanine (CTG) expansion size predict cardiac events and electrocardiographic progression in myotonic dystrophy? ( Clarke, NR; Forfar, JC; Hilton-Jones, D; Kelion, AD; Nixon, J, 2001) |
| "Direct randomized comparisons of regorafenib, TAS-102, and fruquintinib for treating metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are lacking." | 5.05 | Regorafenib, TAS-102, or fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer: any difference in randomized trials? ( Li, J; Peng, Z; Shen, L; Wang, Q; Wang, X; Zhang, Q, 2020) |
| "The standard first- and second- line chemotherapy backbone regimens for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) are 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/capecitabine-based with addition of irinotecan or oxaliplatin." | 3.96 | Review of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment pathways and early clinical experience of trifluridine/tipiracil in the UK named patient programme. ( Carter, AM; Iveson, T; Mullamitha, S; Shiu, KK; Spooner, C; Stevens, D, 2020) |
| "To assess whether the size of the cytosine-thymine-guanine (CTG) expansion mutation in myotonic dystrophy predicts progression of conduction system disease and cardiac events." | 3.71 | Does cytosine-thymine-guanine (CTG) expansion size predict cardiac events and electrocardiographic progression in myotonic dystrophy? ( Clarke, NR; Forfar, JC; Hilton-Jones, D; Kelion, AD; Nixon, J, 2001) |
| "Oesophageal cancer is the fifth most frequent cause of cancer death world wide and most of these cancers occur in developing countries." | 2.40 | Molecular precursor lesions in oesophageal cancer. ( Hainaut, P; Montesano, R, 1998) |
| "At the time of disease progression, FOLFIRI cetuximab regimen was reintroduced resulting in stabilization of disease and he continued with capecitabine cetuximab therapy until disease progression in October 2016." | 1.56 | Evaluation of RAS mutational status through BEAMing assay to monitor disease progression of metastatic colorectal cancer: a case report. ( Antonuzzo, L; Castiglione, F; Di Costanzo, F; Lastraioli, E; Lavacchi, D; Messerini, L; Palmieri, VE, 2020) |
| "In the clinic, however, disease progression can be identified through a composite of factors, including new lesions, carcinoembryonic antigen level, and symptoms such as pain and fatigue." | 1.56 | Optimizing the treatment sequence from second-line to third-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. ( Bekaii-Saab, TS; Grothey, A; Prager, GW; Yoshino, T, 2020) |
| "Two families with frontotemporal dementia with parkinsonism linked to chromosome 17 (FTDP-17) resulting from the microtubule associated protein tau (MAPT) gene IVS10+16C>T splice site mutation are reported, members of which showed variable clinical phenotypes at presentation." | 1.35 | Intrafamilial clinical phenotypic heterogeneity with MAPT gene splice site IVS10+16C>T mutation. ( Larner, AJ, 2009) |
| "The discrimination of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) from another NAFLD was made by NAFLD activity score (NAS), and a NAS>or=5 was considered NASH." | 1.34 | Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T mutation and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. ( Ataç, FB; Bilezikçi, B; Güçlü, M; Kayaselçuk, F; Ozer, B; Serin, E; Verdi, H; Yilmaz, U, 2007) |
| "Relative risks (RRs) of cancer and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated by Cox proportional hazards regression analysis." | 1.32 | Integrin beta3 Leu33Pro homozygosity and risk of cancer. ( Bojesen, SE; Nordestgaard, BG; Tybjaerg-Hansen, A, 2003) |
| Timeframe | Studies, this research(%) | All Research% |
|---|---|---|
| pre-1990 | 0 (0.00) | 18.7374 |
| 1990's | 2 (9.52) | 18.2507 |
| 2000's | 8 (38.10) | 29.6817 |
| 2010's | 6 (28.57) | 24.3611 |
| 2020's | 5 (23.81) | 2.80 |
| Authors | Studies |
|---|---|
| Zhang, Q | 1 |
| Wang, Q | 1 |
| Wang, X | 1 |
| Li, J | 2 |
| Shen, L | 1 |
| Peng, Z | 1 |
| Iveson, T | 1 |
| Carter, AM | 1 |
| Shiu, KK | 1 |
| Spooner, C | 1 |
| Stevens, D | 1 |
| Mullamitha, S | 1 |
| Siebenhüner, A | 1 |
| De Dosso, S | 1 |
| Meisel, A | 1 |
| Wagner, AD | 1 |
| Borner, M | 1 |
| Lastraioli, E | 1 |
| Lavacchi, D | 1 |
| Palmieri, VE | 1 |
| Castiglione, F | 1 |
| Messerini, L | 1 |
| Di Costanzo, F | 1 |
| Antonuzzo, L | 1 |
| Grothey, A | 1 |
| Bekaii-Saab, TS | 1 |
| Yoshino, T | 1 |
| Prager, GW | 2 |
| Arnold, D | 1 |
| Quintela, A | 1 |
| Stein, A | 1 |
| Moreno Vera, S | 1 |
| Mounedji, N | 1 |
| Taieb, J | 1 |
| Patel, AK | 1 |
| Duh, MS | 1 |
| Barghout, V | 1 |
| Yenikomshian, MA | 1 |
| Xiao, Y | 1 |
| Wynant, W | 1 |
| Tabesh, M | 1 |
| Fuchs, CS | 1 |
| Shitara, K | 1 |
| Doi, T | 1 |
| Dvorkin, M | 1 |
| Mansoor, W | 1 |
| Arkenau, HT | 1 |
| Prokharau, A | 1 |
| Alsina, M | 1 |
| Ghidini, M | 1 |
| Faustino, C | 1 |
| Gorbunova, V | 1 |
| Zhavrid, E | 1 |
| Nishikawa, K | 1 |
| Hosokawa, A | 1 |
| Yalçın, Ş | 1 |
| Fujitani, K | 1 |
| Beretta, GD | 1 |
| Cutsem, EV | 1 |
| Winkler, RE | 1 |
| Makris, L | 1 |
| Ilson, DH | 1 |
| Tabernero, J | 1 |
| Heidari, Z | 1 |
| Mahmoudzadeh-Sagheb, H | 1 |
| Hashemi, M | 1 |
| Rigi-Ladiz, MA | 1 |
| Lee, H | 1 |
| Kim, SK | 1 |
| Kim, YI | 1 |
| Kim, TS | 1 |
| Kang, SH | 1 |
| Park, WS | 1 |
| Yun, T | 1 |
| Eom, HS | 1 |
| Wang, Y | 1 |
| Lin, L | 1 |
| Xu, H | 1 |
| Li, T | 1 |
| Zhou, Y | 1 |
| Dan, H | 1 |
| Jiang, L | 1 |
| Liao, G | 1 |
| Zhou, M | 1 |
| Li, L | 1 |
| Zeng, X | 1 |
| Chen, Q | 1 |
| Larner, AJ | 1 |
| Bojesen, SE | 1 |
| Tybjaerg-Hansen, A | 1 |
| Nordestgaard, BG | 1 |
| Thibaudin, L | 1 |
| Berthoux, P | 1 |
| Thibaudin, D | 1 |
| Mariat, C | 1 |
| Berthoux, F | 1 |
| Khalil, MS | 1 |
| El Nahas, AM | 1 |
| Blakemore, AI | 1 |
| Galimberti, D | 1 |
| Scalabrini, D | 1 |
| Fenoglio, C | 1 |
| Comi, C | 1 |
| De Riz, M | 1 |
| Venturelli, E | 1 |
| Lovati, C | 1 |
| Mariani, C | 1 |
| Monaco, F | 1 |
| Bresolin, N | 1 |
| Scarpini, E | 1 |
| Serin, E | 1 |
| Güçlü, M | 1 |
| Ataç, FB | 1 |
| Verdi, H | 1 |
| Kayaselçuk, F | 1 |
| Ozer, B | 1 |
| Bilezikçi, B | 1 |
| Yilmaz, U | 1 |
| Nemunaitis, J | 1 |
| Cox, J | 1 |
| Meyer, W | 1 |
| Courtney, A | 1 |
| Mues, G | 1 |
| Montesano, R | 1 |
| Hainaut, P | 1 |
| Yoo, J | 1 |
| Robinson, RA | 1 |
| Clarke, NR | 1 |
| Kelion, AD | 1 |
| Nixon, J | 1 |
| Hilton-Jones, D | 1 |
| Forfar, JC | 1 |
| Trial | Phase | Enrollment | Study Type | Start Date | Status | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phase II Trial of TAS-102 in Patients With Advanced, Refractory Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma[NCT04923529] | Phase 2 | 28 participants (Anticipated) | Interventional | 2021-03-01 | Recruiting | ||
| Randomized, Double-blind, Phase 3 Study Evaluating TAS-102 Plus Best Supportive Care (BSC) Versus Placebo Plus BSC in Patients With Metastatic Gastric Cancer Refractory to Standard Treatments[NCT02500043] | Phase 3 | 507 participants (Actual) | Interventional | 2016-02-24 | Completed | ||
| [information is prepared from clinicaltrials.gov, extracted Sep-2024] | |||||||
DCR was defined as the proportion of participants with a best overall response of complete response (CR), partial response (PR), or stable disease (SD). The assessment of DCR was based on Investigator review of radiologic images and following RECIST criteria (version 1.1, 2009). (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: From the date of randomization to the cut-off date (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months), assessed every 8 weeks
| Intervention | percentage of participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| TAS-102+BSC | 44.1 |
| Placebo+BSC | 14.5 |
"Overall response rate was defined as the percentage of participants with objective evidence of complete response (CR) or partial response (PR).~CR was defined as the disappearance of all target or non-target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes for target lesions or all lymph nodes for non-target lesions were non-pathological morphologically that was reduced in size in short axis to < 10 mm.~PR was defined as target lesions with at least 30% decrease in the sum of diameters, taking baseline sum diameters as reference." (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: From the date of randomization to the cut-off date (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months), assessed every 8 weeks
| Intervention | percentage of participants (Number) |
|---|---|
| TAS-102+BSC | 4.5 |
| Placebo+BSC | 2.1 |
OS was defined as the time from the date of randomization to the date of death due to any cause. Participants without documented death were censored at last follow-up or cut-off date, whichever comes first. OS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: From the date of randomization to the data cut-off date (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | months (Median) |
|---|---|
| TAS-102+BSC | 5.7 |
| Placebo+BSC | 3.6 |
PFS was defined as the time from randomization until the date of first occurrence of investigator-assessed radiological disease progression or death due to any cause, whichever came first. Disease progression as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) for target lesions were defined as target lesions with at least 20 % relative increase in the sum of diameters with reference to the smallest sum on study, including the baseline sum and this sum demonstrated an absolute increase of at least 5 millimeter (mm) or the appearance of one or more new lesions or Unequivocal progression of existing non-target lesions. All alive participants with no disease progression as of the analysis cut-off date were censored at the last tumor assessment. PFS was estimated by Kaplan-Meier method. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: From the date of randomization to the cut-off date (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | months (Median) |
|---|---|
| TAS-102+BSC | 2.0 |
| Placebo+BSC | 1.8 |
The ECOG performance status was used to evaluate participant's disease progression and the effect of the disease on the participant's activities of daily living. It ranges on the scale from 0-5 (0 = normal activity; 1= symptoms but ambulatory; 2= in bed for < 50% of the time; 3= in bed for > 50% of the time; 4= 100% bedridden; 5= dead). Time to definitive deterioration in ECOG performance status score from baseline was defined as a change from 0, 1 to >=2, or from 2 to >=3. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: At the time of randomization (Day 1 Cycle 1) and within 24 hours prior to start of study treatment in every cycle (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | months (Median) |
|---|---|
| TAS-102+BSC | 4.3 |
| Placebo+BSC | 2.3 |
EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a cancer-specific instrument with 30 questions for evaluation of new chemotherapy and provides an assessment of participant reported outcome dimensions. First 28 questions used 4-point scale (1=not at all,2=a little,3=quite a bit,4=very much) for evaluating 5 functional scales (physical,role,emotional,cognitive,social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue,nausea/vomiting,pain) and other single items. For each item,high score represented high level of symptomatology/problem. Last 2 questions represented participant's assessment of overall health and QoL, coded on 7-point scale (1=very poor to 7=excellent). EORTC QLQ-C30 observed values and change from baseline for global health status (scoring of questions 29 and 30) and 5 functional scales, 3 symptom scales and other single items (scoring of questions 1 to 28). Answers were converted into grading scale, with values between 0 and 100. A high score represented a favorable outcome with a best QoL for participant. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: Baseline, Day 1 Cycle 2 up to end of treatment (EOT) (within 30 days of last study treatment) and 30-Day safety follow-up visit (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycle 1 | Cycle 2 | Cycle 3 | Cycle 4 | Cycle 5 | Cycle 6 | Cycle 7 | Cycle 8 | Cycle 9 | Cycle 10 | Cycle 11 | Cycle 12 | Cycle 13 | Last Collection Cycle | Safety Follow-Up | |
| TAS-102+BSC | -2.7 | -5.9 | -4.1 | -3.6 | -5.9 | -8.8 | -9.5 | -4.3 | 2.4 | -14.4 | -16.7 | -8.3 | 0.0 | -8.8 | -16.5 |
EORTC-QLQ-C30 is a cancer-specific instrument with 30 questions for evaluation of new chemotherapy and provides an assessment of participant reported outcome dimensions. First 28 questions used 4-point scale (1=not at all,2=a little,3=quite a bit,4=very much) for evaluating 5 functional scales (physical,role,emotional,cognitive,social), 3 symptom scales (fatigue,nausea/vomiting,pain) and other single items. For each item,high score represented high level of symptomatology/problem. Last 2 questions represented participant's assessment of overall health and QoL, coded on 7-point scale (1=very poor to 7=excellent). EORTC QLQ-C30 observed values and change from baseline for global health status (scoring of questions 29 and 30) and 5 functional scales, 3 symptom scales and other single items (scoring of questions 1 to 28). Answers were converted into grading scale, with values between 0 and 100. A high score represented a favorable outcome with a best QoL for participant. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: Baseline, Day 1 Cycle 2 up to end of treatment (EOT) (within 30 days of last study treatment) and 30-Day safety follow-up visit (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | units on a scale (Mean) | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cycle 1 | Cycle 2 | Cycle 3 | Cycle 4 | Cycle 5 | Cycle 6 | Cycle 7 | Cycle 8 | Cycle 9 | Cycle 10 | Cycle 11 | Cycle 12 | Cycle 13 | Cycle 14 | Cycle 15 | Last Collection Cycle | Safety Follow-Up | |
| Placebo+BSC | -5.9 | -7.3 | -1.4 | -1.7 | 11.1 | 15.6 | 20.0 | 16.7 | 16.7 | 25.0 | 25.0 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 33.3 | 33.3 | -9.8 | -8.9 |
The Quality of Life Questionnaire Stomach Cancer Module 22 (QLQ-STO22) assessed symptoms and treatment-related side effects commonly reported in participants. There are 22 questions which comprise 5 scales (dysphagia, dietary restrictions, pain QS22, reflux, and anxiety) and 4 single items (dry mouth, hair loss, taste problems, body image). Most questions use 4-point scale (1='Not at all', 2=a little, 3=quite a bit and 4='Very much'). A linear transformation was used to standardize all scores and single-items to a scale of 0 to 100, where higher score=better level of functioning or greater degree of symptoms. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: Baseline, Cycle 1 Day 1 up to end of treatment (EOT) (within 30 days of last study treatment) (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | percentage of participants (Number) | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dysphagia | Dietary Restrictions | Pain QS22 | Reflux | Anxiety | Dry Mouth | Body Image | Hair Loss | Taste Problems | |
| Placebo+BSC | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 | 78.2 |
| TAS-102+BSC | 86.6 | 86.6 | 86.6 | 86.6 | 86.6 | 86.4 | 85.8 | 86.6 | 86.6 |
Any untoward medical condition that occurs in a participants while participating in a clinical study and does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the use of the study medication was considered an adverse event (AE). A serious adverse event (SAE) was defined as any untoward medical occurrence that resulted in any of the following outcomes: death, life-threatening, required initial or prolonged in-patient hospitalization, persistent or significant disability/incapacity, congenital anomaly/birth defect, or considered as medically important event. TEAEs/TESAEs were defined as events that started on or after treatment or started before treatment and worsened after the start of treatment through 30 days after the last dose of study treatment. (NCT02500043)
Timeframe: From the first dose of study treatment until 30 days after the last dose of study treatment (maximum duration: up to approximately 46 months)
| Intervention | Participants (Count of Participants) | |
|---|---|---|
| TEAE | TESAE | |
| Placebo+BSC | 151 | 70 |
| TAS-102+BSC | 319 | 143 |
4 reviews available for thymine and Disease Exacerbation
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Regorafenib, TAS-102, or fruquintinib for metastatic colorectal cancer: any difference in randomized trials?
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Benzofurans; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Colorectal Neoplasms; Disea | 2020 |
Metastatic Colorectal Carcinoma after Second Progression and the Role of Trifluridine-Tipiracil (TAS-102) in Switzerland.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Clinical Trials, Phase III as Topic; Colorectal Neop | 2020 |
Beyond second-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: a systematic review.
Topics: Colorectal Neoplasms; Disease Progression; Drug Combinations; Drugs, Investigational; Humans; Neopla | 2018 |
Molecular precursor lesions in oesophageal cancer.
Topics: Adenine; Adenocarcinoma; Base Pairing; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; Clone Cells; Disease Progression; E | 1998 |
1 trial available for thymine and Disease Exacerbation
16 other studies available for thymine and Disease Exacerbation
| Article | Year |
|---|---|
Review of metastatic colorectal cancer treatment pathways and early clinical experience of trifluridine/tipiracil in the UK named patient programme.
Topics: Aged; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Camptothecin; Colorectal Neoplasms; Disease Pr | 2020 |
Evaluation of RAS mutational status through BEAMing assay to monitor disease progression of metastatic colorectal cancer: a case report.
Topics: Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Bevacizumab; Camptothecin; Capecitabine; Cetuximab; | 2020 |
Optimizing the treatment sequence from second-line to third-line therapy in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.
Topics: Antineoplastic Agents; Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols; Colorectal Neoplasms; Disease | 2020 |
Real-world Treatment Patterns Among Patients With Colorectal Cancer Treated With Trifluridine/Tipiracil and Regorafenib.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Antineoplastic Agents; Colorectal Neoplasms; Disease Progression; Drug Combinations; Dr | 2018 |
Quantitative analysis of interdental Gingiva in patients with chronic periodontitis and transforming growth factor-β1 29C/T gene polymorphisms.
Topics: Adult; Alleles; Azo Compounds; Case-Control Studies; Chronic Periodontitis; Collagen; Coloring Agent | 2014 |
Early determination of prognosis by interim 3'-deoxy-3'-18F-fluorothymidine PET in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Area Under Curve; Disease Progression; Female; Fluorodeoxyglucose F1 | 2014 |
Genetic variants in AKT1 gene were associated with risk and survival of OSCC in Chinese Han Population.
Topics: Aged; Alleles; Carcinoma, Squamous Cell; China; Cohort Studies; Cytosine; Disease Progression; Ethni | 2015 |
Intrafamilial clinical phenotypic heterogeneity with MAPT gene splice site IVS10+16C>T mutation.
Topics: Atrophy; Base Sequence; Brain; Brain Chemistry; Cytosine; Disease Progression; DNA; DNA Mutational A | 2009 |
Integrin beta3 Leu33Pro homozygosity and risk of cancer.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Alleles; Animals; Cytosine; Denmark; Disease Progression; Female; Ge | 2003 |
G protein beta3 subunit C825T polymorphism in primary IgA nephropathy.
Topics: Adult; Alleles; Cytosine; Disease Progression; Female; Gene Frequency; Genotype; Glomerulonephritis, | 2004 |
Transforming growth factor-beta1 SNPs: genetic and phenotypic correlations in progressive kidney insufficiency.
Topics: Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Arginine; Case-Control Studies; Cytosine; Disease Progression; Femal | 2005 |
CXCL10 haplotypes and multiple sclerosis: association and correlation with clinical course.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Chemokine CXCL10; Chemokines, CXC; Cytosine; Disease Progression; Exons; Fe | 2007 |
Methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase C677T mutation and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.
Topics: Adult; Case-Control Studies; Cytosine; Disease Progression; Fatty Liver; Female; Gene Frequency; Gen | 2007 |
Irinotecan hydrochloride (CPT-11) resistance identified by K-ras mutation in patients with progressive colon cancer after treatment with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU).
Topics: Adenine; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Antimetabolites, Antineoplastic; Antineoplastic Agents, Phy | 1997 |
H-ras gene mutations in salivary gland mucoepidermoid carcinomas.
Topics: Adenine; Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Aged, 80 and over; Aspartic Acid; Carcinoma, Mucoepidermoid; Child | 2000 |
Does cytosine-thymine-guanine (CTG) expansion size predict cardiac events and electrocardiographic progression in myotonic dystrophy?
Topics: Adult; Aged; Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Cytosine; Death, Sudden, Cardiac; Defibrillators, Implantable; Di | 2001 |