Thyroid Gland Removal With or Without Central Lymph Node Dissection in Treating Patients With Node Negative Thyroid Cancer
Phase: PHASE2
Conditions: Stage I Papillary Thyroid Cancer, Stage II Papillary Thyroid Cancer, Stage III Papillary Thyroid Cancer
Sponsor: University of Wisconsin, Madison

 
Central Neck Dissection in Patients with 
Clinical Node Negative Thyroid Cancer 
 
 
Authors: 
Rebecca Sippel, MD 
Principal Investigator 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
 
& 
Nadine Connor, PhD 
Co-Principal Investigator 
University of Wisconsin-Madison 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
NCT02138214 
 
 
 
 
Original Protocol Version Date: 12-Mar-2014 
Revision 1 Date: 18-Apr-2014 
Revision 2 Date: 04-Sep-2014 
Revision 3 Date: 16-Feb-2015 
Revision 4 Date: 06-Apr-2015 
Revision 5 Date: 14-Sep-2015 
Revision 6 Date: 23-Oct-2015 
Revision 7 Date: 01-May-2016  
Revision 8 Date: 20-Dec-2016 
Revision 9 Date: 06-Oct-2017 
Revision 10 Date: 22-Feb-2018 
Revision 11 Date: 19-Jul-2018 
Revision 12 Date: 13-Sep-2018 
Revision 13 Date: 17-Jan-2020 
 
 
HSIRB# 2014-0391 (UW13115) 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 2 of 34 
Summary 
 
Thyroid cancer is usually treated with the complete surgical removal of the thyroid gland, but due to 
concerns that the cancer may recur in the future, lymph nodes in the central part of the neck may also 
be surgically removed. Unfortunately, the additional lymph node surgery may be associated with 
increased risks for complications such as inadequate calcium, problems with voice function, swallowing 
deficits, and generally diminished quality of life. Because the risks for these complications are poorly 
defined, we propose to do a clinical trial where we will compare clinical recurrence rates and 
complication levels in patients with papillary thyroid cancer who have thyroid gland removal alone to 
those who receive thyroid gland removal plus lymph node surgery in the central neck. 
 
In this clinical trial, 70 - 140 patients undergoing surgery treatment for thyroid cancer will be enrolled 
into one of three treatment arms. Patients receiving total thyroidectomy for papillary thyroid cancer 
(PTC) with no pre-operative evidence of distant or cervical lymph node metastasis will be randomized 
into one of two arms: prophylactic central neck dissection or no central neck dissection. Patients who 
are not eligible for randomization will be enrolled into a third standard of care arm. We will then 
compare the three cohorts: (1) To determine the rate of transient and persistent hypocalcemia; (2) To 
determine the rate of voice and swallowing problems; (3) To determine the degree to which HR-QOL is 
compromised; (4) To determine clinical recurrence rates; (5) To determine the degree to which Natural 
Language Processing (NLP) tools can extract and document quality of life measures from patient 
interview narratives; (6) To determine the extent of correlation among quality of life measures obtained 
from patient interview narratives and those from traditionally administered quality of life surveys. 
 
 
 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 3 of 34 
Figure 1: Trial overview diagram 
Participant Provides Informed Consent 
Participant is identified through the medical record 
or MD practice & meets gross eligibility criteria. 
Participant undergoes baseline pre-operation procedures to confirm eligibility.  
Includes pre-operative ultrasound (if not already done) 
Participant is randomized during surgery as eligibility will 
be confirmed intra-operatively. Blinding to arm occurs. 
Arm 2 
Receive CND 
Arm 1 
No CND 
Post-Op Day 1: Participant is discharged with a symptom log to record daily calcium intake 
and other symptoms. Abstraction of laboratory data from medical record. 
2 Weeks: Symptom log collected, voice and swallow5 evaluation (if not done as part of 
SOC), QOL and interviews completed. Participant  
unblinded to treatment arm.  Abstraction of laboratory data from medical record.  
6 Weeks: Voice evaluation repeated (when 2 weeks evaluation is abnormal), QOL and 
interviews completed.  Radioactive iodine ablation considered for intermediate-risk level 
patients per protocol (considered SOC). Blood samples collected.  Abstraction of laboratory 
data from medical record. 
6 Months: QOL and interviews completed. Blood samples collected.  Abstraction of 
laboratory data from medical record.   
1 Year: QOL and interviews. Blood samples collected.  Abstraction of laboratory data from 
medical record.   
Participant is enrolled and undergoes baseline voice and swallow5 
evaluation and QOL assessment and interviews.  
Participant completes quality improvement follow-up survey 
Arm 3 
SOC Group 
Randomization Group 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 4 of 34 
Schedule of activities 
 
 
Visit 1 
Visit 2 
Visit 3 
Visit 4 
Visit 5 
Visit 6 
Visit 7 
 
 
Screening 
Day of 
Operation 
Post-Op 
Day 12 
 
Week 6 
Cancer 
Screen 
Month 6 
1 Year 
Follow-up 
Window 
6 weeks-
24 hours 
before 
operation 
 
0-2 days 
± 8 
days 
4-20 
weeks 
+2-7 days 
after 
Week 6 
±6 
weeks1 
10 −18 
months 
+10-19 
months 
(+1-6 
weeks post 
1 year) 
Informed Consent Obtained 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Venipuncture 
SOC 
 
SOC 
SOC 
SOC 
SOC2, 3, 4 
CI 
SOC 
 
Calcium3 
SOC3 
 
SOC3, 5 
SOC3, 5 
 
 
X5, 17 
CI 5, 17, 18 
 
Parathyroid Hormone (PTH)3 
SOC3 
 
SOC3, 5 
SOC3, 5 
 
 
X5, 17 
CI 5, 17, 18 
 
 Vitamin D17 
CI6, 17 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Neck Ultrasound 
SOC7 
 
 
 
 
 
SOC 
SOC 
 
Chest X-ray8 
SOC8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Comprehensive Voice Evaluation: Phonation Threshold 
Pressure, Dysphonia Symptom Index, CAPE-V, GRBAS, 
Stroboscopy, Glottal Function Index, VHI 
CI9 
 
 
CI9 
CI10 
 
CI10 
CI10 
 
Swallow Evaluation: standardized videofluoroscopic 
swallow study15 
X11 
 
 
CI11 
 CI11 
 
CI11 
CI11 
 
Quality of Life Surveys, including:  
(1) the Short Form 12 (SF-12, Medical Outcomes 
Trust); 
(2) The European Organization for Research and 
Treatment of Cancer QOL instrument (EORTC QLQ 
C30);  
(3) The Voice Handicap Index (VHI) for assessing voice-
related QOL (part of voice evaluation); 
(4) the EAT-10 Swallow Instrument);  
(5) Thyroid Cancer QOL (Thy-Ca QOL) 
X 
 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
 
Interviews (Audio Recorded) 
X 
 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
 
Participant Receives Symptom Log3, 12 
X3, 12 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Randomization13 
 
X13 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Enrolled 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Adverse Events Monitoring 
 
X 
 
X 
X 
 
X 
X 
 
Endocrine Consult14 
 
 
 
SOC14 
 
 
 
 
 
Participant Returns Symptom Log & it is Reviewed3 
 
 
 
X3 
 
 
 
 
 
Participant & Study Staff Unblinded 
 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Unstimulated Thyroglobulin15 
 
 
 
 
SOC15, 16 
 
SOC15 
SOC15 
 
Stimulated Thyroglobulin15 
 
 
 
 
 
SOC2, 15 
SOC15 
SOC15 
 
Radioactive iodine (RAI) Whole Body Scan2 
 
 
 
 
 
SOC2 
 
CI4 
 
QI follow-up survey is administered via email 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
X 
Procedure Key:  SOC = performed as needed per Standard of Care;  X = Research Only;  CI = Clinically Indicated (performed SOC if 
warranted by patient’s condition, otherwise the procedure will be done as part of research) 
 
       1The Month 6 time point must occur at least 4 weeks after the RAI is given, if applicable.  
2Patients with an elevated unstimulated thyroglobulin level (>2 ng/mL) at Week 6 and/or an intermediate or high risk level will be evaluated for standard of care 
radioactive iodine ablation therapy and corresponding TSH stimulated thyroglobulin lab and radioactive iodine whole body scan. 
3Only patients who receive at least a total thyroidectomy (e.g. total thyroidectomy with central neck dissection, total thyroidectomy with lateral neck dissection) 
4If Thyroglobulin >2ng/ml and neck US is negative (randomized patients only) 
5All participants will be asked to stop their calcium and calcitriol supplementation 12 hours prior to their follow up appointment(s) so that a repeat calcium and PTH 
level can be checked. 
6Vitamin D is clinically indicated if PTH is elevated or calcium is low. 
7Ultrasounds within three months of surgery can be used for screening purposes. 
8CXR only performed as needed at screening to rule out metastases. 
9Voice evaluations are routinely performed pre-operatively in patients with prior neck surgery or voice complaints and post-operatively in anyone with a voice concern. 
10Evaluations will only be obtained if results are abnormal at previous evaluation. 
11Swallow studies were eliminated as of 12/01/2016. 
12Between Visits 2 and 4, participants will be asked to record daily any symptoms which they think may be related to hypocalcemia (paresthesias, muscle cramps, etc). 
They will be asked to describe the symptoms and mark the time that the symptoms occurred and the severity of the symptoms (graded on a scale of 1-5). They will 
record the doses of calcium administered and how long it took the symptoms to resolve. Participants will total their daily calcium intakes. They will be instructed to 
contact us if they are requiring greater than 8 g /day and in such instances will be started on calcitriol 0.25 mcg twice daily to increase their intestinal calcium 
absorption. 
13Randomization only performed for patients receiving total thyroidectomy with histologically confirmed diagnosis of PTC and no evidence of metastases.  
14Only patients with histologically confirmed cancer diagnosis. Consult will occur at approximately two weeks after surgery for patients who receive total thyroidectomy 
and at approximately six to eight weeks after surgery for those who receive partial thyroidectomy.  
15Thyroglobulin determinations will also include anti-thyroglobulin antibody. 
16An unstimulated thyroglobulin level will be obtained at Week 6 to assist in decision making regarding the necessity for radioactive iodine ablation therapy. 
17 Randomization patients only. Patients enrolled into the standard of care arm will not receive special labs for research only.  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 5 of 34 
18 Calcium and PTH drawn at one year post surgery only if values for these are abnormal at month 6 time point. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Table of Contents 
 
Summary ...........................................................................................................................................2 
Trial overview diagram .......................................................................................................................3 
Schedule of activities .........................................................................................................................4 
List of abbreviations and definitions ...................................................................................................6 
1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................8 
1.1. 
Background ................................................................................................................................... 8 
1.2. 
Rationale and hypothesis ............................................................................................................. 9 
2. Objectives ......................................................................................................................................9 
2.1. 
Primary outcome and endpoints .................................................................................................. 9 
2.2. 
Secondary outcomes and endpoints .......................................................................................... 10 
3. Study design ................................................................................................................................ 11 
4. Study population .......................................................................................................................... 16 
4.1. 
Inclusion criteria ......................................................................................................................... 16 
4.2. 
Exclusion criteria ......................................................................................................................... 16 
4.3. 
Intra-operation exclusion criteria ............................................................................................... 16 
4.4. 
Protected populations ................................................................................................................ 16 
5. Trial interventions ........................................................................................................................ 16 
5.1. 
Treatment Arm 1, Group 1 (No CND) ......................................................................................... 16 
5.2. 
Treatment Arm 2, Group 2 (CND) ............................................................................................... 16 
5.3. 
Allocation to intervention ........................................................................................................... 16 
6. Participant recruitment and consent ............................................................................................. 17 
6.1. 
Participant identification ............................................................................................................ 17 
6.2. 
Screening .................................................................................................................................... 17 
6.3. 
Recruitment and consent ........................................................................................................... 17 
7. Activities and measurements ........................................................................................................ 18 
7.1. 
Table: Time points for data collection ........................................................................................ 19 
7.2. 
Blood sample collection .............................................................................................................. 21 
7.3. 
Data entry ................................................................................................................................... 21 
7.4. 
Participant withdrawals .............................................................................................................. 21 
7.5. 
Stopping rules ............................................................................................................................. 22 
8. Data analysis and statistical considerations ................................................................................... 22 
8.1. 
Sample size determination ......................................................................................................... 22 
8.2. 
Analysis of endpoints .................................................................................................................. 23 
9. Risks and benefits of trial participation ......................................................................................... 23 
9.1. 
Potential risks ............................................................................................................................. 24 
9.2. 
Mitigation of potential risks ....................................................................................................... 25 
9.3. 
Potential benefits and risk-to-benefit ratio ................................................................................ 26 
10. Adverse events and unanticipated problems ............................................................................... 27 
10.1. Adverse event definitions ........................................................................................................... 27 
10.2. Severity assessment ................................................................................................................... 27 
10.3. Causality assessment .................................................................................................................. 27 
10.4. Procedures for recording and reporting adverse events ........................................................... 27 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 6 of 34 
11. Trial safety monitoring ............................................................................................................... 28 
11.1. Data Safety Monitoring Committee ........................................................................................... 28 
11.2. Review and oversight requirements ........................................................................................... 29 
11.3. Expedited reporting of Serious Adverse Events ......................................................................... 30 
12. Administrative requirements ...................................................................................................... 33 
12.1. Good clinical practice ................................................................................................................. 33 
12.2. Data quality assurance ............................................................................................................... 33 
12.3. Study monitoring ........................................................................................................................ 33 
12.4. Ethical consideration .................................................................................................................. 33 
12.5. Patient confidentiality ................................................................................................................ 33 
12.6. Investigator compliance ............................................................................................................. 34 
12.7. Participant cost and payment ..................................................................................................... 34 
13. Funding sources ......................................................................................................................... 34 
14. Publication policy ....................................................................................................................... 34 
 
 
 
 
 
List of abbreviations and definitions  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 7 of 34 
AE 
Adverse event 
ATA 
American Thyroid Association 
CAPE-V 
Consensus Auditory Perceptual Evaluation of Voice 
CND 
Central neck dissection 
CRF 
Case report form 
CXR 
Chest x-ray 
DMC 
Data Monitoring Committee 
EORTC 
European Organization Research Treatment of Cancer 
eCRF 
Electronic case report form 
EDC 
Electronic data capture 
FNA 
Fine needle aspiration 
HR-QOL 
Health related quality of life 
IRB 
The institutional review board of record for the study 
MSC 
Mental Component Score 
PCS 
Physical Component Score 
Permanent 
hypoparathyroidism 
Defined as the need for either calcium or calcitriol to prevent symptoms 
of hypocalcemia or a serum calcium <8.0 mg/dL with a PTH <15 pg/mL at 6 
months post-operatively 
PRMC 
Protocol Review Monitoring Committee 
PTH 
Parathyroid hormone 
PTC 
Papillary thyroid cancer 
QOL 
Quality of life 
rTSH 
Recombinant thyroid-stimulating hormone 
RAI 
Radioactive iodine 
SAE 
Serious adverse event 
SOC 
Standard of care 
Tg 
Thyroglobulin 
ThyCa-QOL 
Thyroid Cancer Quality of Life 
UW 
University of Wisconsin 
VHI 
Voice Handicap Index 
 
 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 8 of 34 
1. Introduction  
 
1.1. 
Background  
Each year in the United States 46,670 new cases of thyroid cancer are diagnosed. The incidence of 
thyroid cancer in the United States has increased nearly 2.4-fold from 1950 to 2000. It is therefore 
critically important that treatments for this disease are grounded in high levels of research evidence. 
 
Currently, complete removal of the thyroid (total thyroidectomy) is the primary treatment for papillary 
thyroid cancer (PTC).  A prophylactic (preventative) central neck dissection to remove the lymph nodes 
near the thyroid is also often performed along with the total thyroidectomy.   
 
A therapeutic central neck dissection (CND) is performed if there is evidence of lymph node involvement 
on pre-operative ultrasound or on intra-operative inspection. The removal of clearly involved lymph 
nodes is believed to provide a therapeutic benefit and to aid in local control of disease.  
 
A prophylactic CND is somewhat different because it involves removing lymph nodes that are empirically 
normal on imaging and inspection with the belief that they may contain nascent disease, and if 
removed, will decrease the risk of recurrence. It is well established that central neck lymph nodes 
harbor microscopic lymph node involvement in 60% of cases.  However, it has never been shown in a 
prospective study that prophylactic CND decreases recurrence or improves survival.  
 
The role of prophylactic CND is one of the biggest clinical questions in the management of thyroid 
cancer today. With over 280 retrospective studies and reviews trying to address this question, there is 
still no consensus as to whether or not this procedure offers any real benefits. Instead, this procedure 
may place the patient at risk for serious and pervasive deficits in communicative function, nutrition, 
hydration, and health related quality of life (HR-QOL). Hypoparathyroidism can also result and may lead 
to life-threatening hypocalcemia that requires medications four or more times a day. These 
complications can be devastating, especially for young patients who will have to accommodate these 
consequences for the rest of their lives. However, removal of lymph nodes by means of a prophylactic 
CND at the initial operation may decrease the need for repeat surgery and its associated higher risks.  
 
This debate came to the forefront when the American Thyroid Association (ATA) issued consensus 
guidelines in 2006 that recommended consideration of a prophylactic CND in all patients with thyroid 
cancer. These guidelines were based on retrospective studies using historical controls because higher 
levels of evidence were lacking.  After the guidelines were published, there was a flurry of further 
retrospective studies performed in attempt to either support or refute that recommendation. 
The 2006 ATA practice guidelines were partially revised in 2009 to “recommend,” based on expert 
opinion, an even lower level of evidence than the retrospective study designs found in the previous 
literature. Unfortunately, there remain limited data to either support or refute the 2009 
recommendation.  
 
The randomization arms will compare two accepted standards of care in a Phase II clinical trial. Both 
surgical procedures are widely practiced in the United States for the treatment of thyroid cancer, and it 
is not known which procedure is best. A prophylactic CND may be associated with a higher complication 
rate but may also provide a clinically relevant reduction in disease recurrence. Retrospective reviews 
have been unable to come to a consensus to answer this question adequately. In order to determine the 
optimal surgical management for patients with clinically node negative thyroid cancer, a randomized 
clinical trial is needed. A recent clinical trials planning meeting held at the National Cancer Institute 
picked the issue of prophylactic central neck dissection as the area of thyroid cancer that most needs a 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 9 of 34 
randomized controlled trial. Since not all patients will be eligible for randomization but could provide 
valuable information about the impact of surgery and surgical complications on quality of life, we would 
like to offer patients not eligible for the randomization arms or those that are unable to be randomized 
intraoperatively the ability to participate in the study in the SOC arm. 
 
Background on Natural Language Processing of patient interview narratives: 
 
Traditionally, clinicians and researchers measure quality of life using one of several structured quality of 
life surveys. Such tools can become time-consuming and expensive to employ for research or clinical 
use. Furthermore, these surveys require patients to answer structured questionnaires about their health 
rather than to simply describe their experience in a more natural, narrative format.  
 
Patient use of electronic health resources and health-related social media sites has increased 
significantly in the past few years. These resources offer the opportunity for patients to share their 
experiences in a more natural, narrative format. Making this existing information available to clinicians 
in a validated, standardized format will result in: 1) improved communication between patient and 
physician, 2) efficient longitudinal tracking of quality of life measures within an electronic medical 
record, and 3) retrieval and coding of quality of life data contained in narrative social media content. By 
applying Natural Language Processing (NLP) techniques to patient narratives collected in our qualitative 
interviews, we will be able to see if patients’ natural language be linked to changes in their overall 
quality of life or other factors that could affect patient care.  
 
1.2. 
Rationale and hypothesis 
We propose a clinical trial in which 70 - 140 patients undergoing surgery for PTC with no pre-operative 
evidence of distant metastasis will be enrolled into one of three treatment arms: total thyroidectomy 
with prophylactic central neck dissection, total thyroidectomy without central neck dissection or 
standard of care. The total thyroidectomy patients will be randomized into one of the first two arms. 
The standard of care patients, patients who are not eligible for the randomization arms pre-operatively 
or are unable to be randomized intraoperatively, will be enrolled into the third study arm and will not 
have any aspect of their cancer care modified by study participation but will otherwise follow the same 
follow up study assessment schedule as the patients in the randomization arms. In the absence of this 
clinical trial, patients seen at our center would be offered a total thyroidectomy without central neck 
dissection, which is our current practice standard. At many other major academic centers, however, a 
prophylactic central neck dissection is the standard of care.  Currently about 50% of high volume 
institutions are doing a central neck dissection routinely in their practice. While performing a central 
neck dissection may increase the risks of surgery it may also decrease the risk of recurrence. We do not 
know, given the presently available data, which will be greater, and therefore this study has true clinical 
equipoise.  
 
Our hypothesis is that total thyroidectomy with prophylactic central neck dissection will result in a 
higher complication rate in comparison with total thyroidectomy alone for papillary thyroid cancer. 
 
2. Objectives 
 
2.1. 
Primary outcome and endpoints  
 To determine the rate of transient and permanent hypocalcemia: 
• 
Transient hypoparathyroidism as defined by a Day 1 serum parathyroid hormone (PTH) level 
of <10 pg/ml 
• 
Post-operative serum calcium (mg/dL) and PTH (pg/ml) at Day 12 and Month 6 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 10 of 34 
• 
Total calcium consumption in first 2 weeks (total gm) 
• 
Hypocalcemia symptoms in first 2 weeks (average episodes/day) 
• 
Hypocalcemia symptom severity scale (range of 1-5) 
• 
Requirement for calcium and calcitriol at Month 6 (or, if laboratory values at visit reveal 
calcium < 8 mg/dL and PTH <15 pg/ml) 
 
Calcium and PTH levels, calcium intake, and hypocalcemia symptoms will be monitored post-operatively 
(at Day 1, Day 12, and Month 6) to examine how parathyroid function is affected by a CND.  
Hypoparathyroidism can lead to paresthesias and muscle cramps and is a known complication of total 
thyroidectomy, requiring frequent treatment with calcium and vitamin D. This risk is increased with a 
CND and is thus important to quantify when examining the risk/benefit ratio. Because calcium 
supplementation is routinely administered for symptoms of hypocalcemia in the post-operative period 
and this may impact the interpretation of laboratory evaluations, we will be evaluating a variety of 
metrics to assess the incidence and impact of hypocalcemia on patients.  
 
2.2. 
Secondary outcomes and endpoints 
To determine the rate of voice and swallowing problems, patients will receive videofluoroscopic 
swallowing studies and voice evaluations pre-operatively and post-operatively (at Day 12, Week 6, 
Month 6, and 1 Year visits) to examine how voice and swallow function are affected by inclusion of a 
CND. Voice and/or swallow evaluations may be eliminated once necessary endpoints have been satisfied 
or the evaluation is no longer informative.1  
 
• 
Phonation Threshold Pressure (cm H2O) 
• 
Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI; +5 to -5) 
• 
GRBAS (grade roughness breathiness asthenia strain) 
• 
CAPE-V (0-100 on visual analog scale for voice quality parameters) 
• 
Stroboscopy assessment (ratings 1 [most severe] to 4 [normal]) for vocal fold vibratory and 
movement parameters 
• 
Glottal Function Index score 
• 
Penetration-Aspiration Scale (0-8 score) from videofluoroscopic swallow study1 
 
To determine the degree to which quality of life (QOL) is compromised, qualitative analyses of patient 
interview data and validated surveys of general health quality, as well as QOL surveys specific to cancer, 
thyroid disease, voice and swallowing will be used to assess the impact of complications on patient’s 
lives. 
• 
SF-12 MCS and PCS scores 
• 
EORTC QLQ C30 scale scores 
• 
ThyCA-QOL score 
• 
EAT-10 dysphagia inventory score 
• 
VHI score (collected by UW ENT department during the participant’s voice evaluation, and 
by study personnel if no voice evaluation is needed) 
• 
Themes, codes from interview transcripts (using qualitative research methods) 
 
                                                 
 
1 With the elimination of swallow studies for patients enrolled after 12/01/2016 collection of data for this endpoint 
ceased.  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 11 of 34 
To determine whether accurate quality of life measures can be extracted from patient interview 
narratives, patient interview data will be converted into usable datasets using natural language 
processing techniques and is then compared to QoL surveys specific to cancer and thyroid disease. 
• 
Interview transcripts 
• 
SF-12 MCS and PCS scores 
• 
EORTC QLQ30 scale scores 
• 
ThyCA-QoL score 
 
To determine clinical recurrence rates, measures of thyroglobulin levels (a reliable surrogate marker for 
future recurrence), and clinical evidence of recurrent disease (using either I-131 imaging or neck 
ultrasound), will be made at Month 6 and 1 Year visits. 
• 
Percent of patients with a 1 Year recombinant thyroid-stimulating hormone (rTSH) 
stimulated Thyroglobulin level <1 ng/ml 
• 
Unstimulated Thyroglobulin just prior to beginning the Week 6 radioactive iodine treatment 
• 
Stimulated Thyroglobulin at the time of Week 6 radioactive iodine treatment (if RAI is given) 
• 
Unstimulated Thyroglobulin at Month 6 >1 ng/mL 
• 
Stimulated Thyroglobulin at 1 Year >2 ng/mL 
• 
Biopsy-proven disease identified on neck ultrasound or I-131 uptake at either Month 6 or 1  
Year post surgery, and reevaluated annually while enrolled in the study 
 
For those patients who do experience thyroid cancer recurrence, this typically does not manifest until 10 
to 20 years after their initial treatment. For this reason, in order to capture true clinical recurrence rates, 
participants who receive a diagnosis of PTC, as confirmed by final surgical pathology, and continue to 
receive care within the University of Wisconsin Hospital system will be followed through chart review in 
Health Link as well as University of Wisconsin’s endocrine surgery outcomes database until their cancer 
recurs or they are lost to follow up. 
 
Radioactive iodine treatment, ultrasound, and thyroglobulin monitoring are all part of the standard 
treatment and follow up of thyroid cancer for nodules >1cm. The only test that will be done for research 
purposes is to check the thyroglobulin level prior to radioactive iodine, so that we can assess the 
completeness of surgical excision prior to administering radioactive iodine.  
 
3. Study design 
This study will compare total thyroidectomy which is the standard of care treatment for PTC at the 
University of Wisconsin with total thyroidectomy with prophylactic CND to also remove the lymph nodes 
near the thyroid. Both surgical procedures are widely practiced in the United States for the treatment of 
thyroid cancer and it is not known which procedure is best.  
 
Participant Identification and Eligibility:  
Participants will be primarily identified from all of our University of Wisconsin endocrine surgery and 
otolaryngology clinics.  
 
Eligible patients will have a thyroid nodule >1 cm in size that is consistent with or suspicious for PTC on a 
pre-operative biopsy. All biopsies will be reviewed by pathology to confirm eligibility. Patients with T4 
(tumor of any size that extends beyond the thyroid) tumors, history of degenerative neurological 
diseases, pre-operative vocal cord paralysis or other vocal cord pathology will be excluded. All patients 
will undergo a comprehensive neck ultrasound to evaluate for lymphadenopathy by an experienced 
thyroid radiologist. A comprehensive evaluation of lymph nodes in levels 1-6 will be performed. If the 
patient is proven to have lymph node involvement they will be ineligible for the randomization arms. 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 12 of 34 
Patients without evidence of nodal involvement on pre-operative imaging will be eligible for the 
randomization arms of the trial and consented pre-operatively. Per standard of care at our institution 
and the recommendations of the ATA, thyroid cancer patients are offered various surgical treatments 
depending on the nature of their disease. For example, for those whose cancer is limited to only one 
side of the thyroid, a partial lobectomy may be the appropriate treatment. For this reason, we will only 
approach patients who have elected to undergo total thyroidectomy for the randomization arms. 
Patients who are eligible for the trial but not for randomization (i.e. have evidence of lymph node 
disease or are choosing a thyroid lobectomy) will be approached for consent into the standard of care 
arm.  
 
Pre-Operative Screening and Testing: Pre-operative laboratory testing will include calcium, PTH, and 
Vitamin D testing (Aim 1), a comprehensive voice and swallow1 evaluation (Aim 2), and a complete 
quality of life evaluation using validated questionnaires and semi-structured interviews (Aim 3). Patients 
eligible for the randomization arms will then be randomly assigned - after intraoperative confirmation of 
no suspicious adenopathy or gross local invasion - to one of two treatments on the day of surgery; Arm 
1: total thyroidectomy alone, or Arm 2: total thyroidectomy with ipsilateral prophylactic CND. 
Randomization will be stratified by both age and tumor size to allow appropriate comparisons between 
groups. Allocation schedule will not be known to study staff prior to consenting.  
 
Operative Procedure: Total thyroidectomy will be performed using standard techniques in all patients 
potentially eligible for randomization. An open technique will be used to remove the entire thyroid 
including pyramidal lobe and all visible thyroid tissue. Care will be taken to visualize and preserve both 
recurrent laryngeal nerves and to preserve all parathyroids in situ. All removed specimens will be 
carefully examined for any parathyroid tissue and any devascularized or resected normal parathyroid 
glands will be confirmed by frozen section and autotransplanted into the sternocleidomastoid muscle. 
 
For randomization patients who do not have a pre-operative diagnosis confirming PTC, a frozen section 
of the suspicious nodule(s) will be performed intra-operatively. If frozen section confirms PTC, the 
surgical procedure will continue and the patient will be randomized. If frozen section does not confirm 
cancer, randomization will not occur, and the operative procedure will continue according to clinical 
indication. During surgery, unexpected and suspicious lymphadenopathy will be biopsied. If lymph node 
metastases are found, then a CND would be performed at the discretion of the treating surgeon, and the 
patient will not be randomized.  If lymph node metastases are not found in the biopsy, and the surgeon 
would not otherwise perform a CND based on the observed suspicious lymph node, the participant will 
be randomized per protocol. Once a patient has met both pre-operative intra-operative inclusion criteria 
and the randomization envelope is opened, he or she is enrolled in the study. Patients who screen fail 
intraoperatively will continue their participation with the study as part of the standard of care arm. 
 
Patients randomized to Arm 2 will be receive total thyroidectomy with an ipsilateral CND. The CND will 
be performed as described by a consensus conference of the ATA. This will include removal of the 
prelaryngeal nodes, the pretracheal nodes, and the paratracheal lymph nodes. The paratracheal 
dissection will be bounded superiorly by the cricoid cartilage and inferiorly by the innominate artery on 
the right and on the left by the axial plane where the innominate crosses the trachea. The superior 
parathyroid gland will be preserved in situ along with its primary blood supply from the superior branch 
of the inferior thyroid artery. The inferior parathyroid gland will be reflected laterally along with its 
blood supply from the inferior thyroid artery. Parathyroid autotransplantation will be performed if the 
glands are devascularized during dissection. Paratracheal tissue specimens will be examined for 
parathyroid glands that may be salvaged and transplanted before being removed from the sterile field. 
Suspected parathyroid glands will be confirmed by frozen section biopsy prior to autotransplantation. 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 13 of 34 
 
Blinding: Both surgical procedures are performed through the same incision and post-operative care is 
identical. As such, the neck dressings are identical, allowing both the patients and study staff to be 
masked with regard to treatment arm randomization. Participants will remain blinded to treatment arm 
until the Day 12 follow-up appointment, at which point their pathology report will be reviewed with 
them, and unblinding will occur. Because subjective symptoms and calcium intake are two of our 
secondary endpoints, we will minimize participant and researcher bias in the description and treatment 
of post-operative symptoms in the immediate post-operative period. Because the risks of the two 
procedures and the post-operative instructions are identical for both arms, there is no risk associated 
with blinding the patients until their Day 12 follow-up. Participants who screen fail intra-operatively will 
be notified as to which procedure(s) was conducted immediately following surgery. The surgeon 
performing the procedure cannot and will not be blinded to the participant’s treatment arm at any time. 
 
Post-operative follow-up: Post-operative follow-up will be done in the hospital on post-operative Day 1, 
and clinic follow up will occur at Day 12, Week 6, Month 6, and 1 Year. Patients will be discharged with 
thyroid hormone that will be administered at 1.5-1.7 mcg/kg daily. Patients will be provided a 
hypocalcemia symptom log and will be requested to record their calcium intake and symptoms daily. 
When they have symptoms they will be asked to record the time of the symptoms, what the symptoms 
were, the severity of the symptoms (scale of 1-5), the amount of calcium taken to treat the symptoms, 
and the time to symptom resolution. 
 
All patients will be seen in follow up in the clinic in approximately 2 weeks. A calcium and PTH level will 
be obtained at that visit. Patients will be asked about their calcium intake and their symptoms of 
hypocalcemia, and their symptom log will be reviewed by study staff (Aim 1). Their symptom log will be 
collected at the two-week appointment and abstracted by study staff to determine the total volume of 
calcium supplementation consumed, the type and frequency of hypocalcemia symptoms, and the 
severity of those symptoms when they occurred.  
 
Comprehensive voice and swallow5 evaluations will also be performed at the Day 12 visit, and these 
evaluations will be repeated at Week 6, Month 6, and 1 Year visits (Aim 2) if abnormalities or complaints 
were noted at the previous time point. All of the voice assessments listed in section 2.2 are part of a 
standard voice evaluation which is done routinely for patients with a history of previous neck surgery or 
any voice concerns, either pre-operatively or post-operatively. The video swallow exam is normally only 
done if there are concerns with voice or swallow function post-operatively. If deficits are observed at 
Day 12, appropriate treatment will be provided. This may include watchful waiting, behavioral therapy, 
diet modification, use of injectables, or further surgery. Follow-up assessments at Week 6, Month 6, and 
1 Year will, in these cases, provide preliminary data on treatment outcomes. Patients will also complete 
QOL surveys and interviews to determine the effects (if any) of post-operative complications on overall 
well-being at each visit (Aim 3).  
 
It is difficult to coordinate voice and swallow evaluations with regularly scheduled patient visits. If the 
study team is unable to schedule these procedures on the same day, the subject is given the option of 
returning on a different day of his or her choosing or waiving the evaluation(s) in question at that time 
point. If an exam is missed, the exam will be scheduled at the subject’s next time point. To adequately 
address the secondary endpoints of the study, the study staff only needs to know if the vocal cord is 
working and, if it is not working, if it recovers; this can be assessed with only one post-operative time 
point. Ideally, the study team also hopes to understand the time course of recovery after surgery; 
therefore, we aim to evaluate patients at each time point. The research-only voice and swallow 
evaluations do not affect clinical care for thyroid cancer patients.  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 14 of 34 
 
Subjects will receive an unstimulated thyroglobulin test approximately 6 weeks after surgery. 
Thyroglobulin reaches its nadir 3-4 weeks post-operatively in most patients, making the Week 6 time 
point ideal for collection. In multivariate analysis, the postoperative thyroglobulin level is often found to 
be an independent predictor of persistent or recurrent disease with a level above 0.2 ng/mL considered 
“elevated”. Based on this result as well as the pathology report, the subject’s treating endocrinologist 
will determine his or her risk status. According to the 2015 American Thyroid Association Management 
Guidelines for Adult Patients with Thyroid Nodules and Differentiated Thyroid Cancer, RAI remnant 
ablation is not routinely recommended after thyroidectomy in low-risk patients, although consideration 
of specific features of the individual patient that could modulate recurrence risk, disease follow-up 
implications, and patient preference are relevant to decision making regarding RAI. We will not require 
low-risk patients to undergo RAI remnant ablation in accordance with these guidelines; instead, their 
low risk status and thyroglobulin level < 0.2 ng/mL will classify their response to therapy as excellent. 
Should low-risk patients choose to undergo RAI remnant ablation, they will follow the protocol outlined 
below.  
 
In all intermediate- and high-risk subjects and low-risk subjects who choose to undergo RAI remnant 
ablation therapy, radioactive iodine will be administered at 4-20 weeks post-operatively and will be 
administered with rTSH. For consistency all subjects will be treated with 50 mCi of radioactive iodine 
unless it is strongly recommended otherwise based on specific features of the individual patient. 
Microscopic nodal involvement found on pathologic review will not influence the treatment dose of 
radioactive iodine, but the presence or absence of micrometastatic versus macrometastatic disease will 
be tracked for future analyses. Thyroglobulin levels will be checked after the rTSH stimulation in order to 
assess the burden of disease prior to radioactive iodine treatment.  Following radioactive iodine 
administration, levothyroxine will be administered to maintain TSH < 0.5 uIU/mL. Labs will be checked at 
6-8 week intervals until TSH level is in the goal range and stable. 
 
At Month 6 and 1 Year visits, TSH, unstimulated thyroglobulin and anti-thyroglobulin antibody will be 
measured. Additionally, all patients will receive a neck ultrasound at these time points to further 
evaluate for recurrence. 
 
If the subject underwent RAI remnant ablation, recombinant TSH will be administered and a blood 
sample testing for the stimulated thyroglobulin level will be obtained at the 1 Year visit. If the stimulated 
thyroglobulin is greater than 2 ng/mL and the neck ultrasound is negative, a whole body scan will be 
obtained. Elevated thyroglobulin and/or positive whole body scanning will prompt further evaluation 
with ultrasound, CT, MRI, or CT-PET as needed. All participants will be followed for a minimum of 1 year 
after treatment. Long term follow-up tracking the incidence of disease recurrence will be conducted 
throughout the entirety of the study, with the goal of tracking patients beyond the active study phase 
through our prospective endocrine surgical database. 
 
Long-term follow-up: Participants who receive a diagnosis of PTC, as confirmed by final surgical 
pathology, and continue to receive care within the University of Wisconsin Hospital system will be 
followed through chart review and the endocrine surgery outcomes database until their cancers recur or 
they are lost to follow up. Clinical documentation of cancer recurrence only, if it occurs, will be 
abstracted from their electronic medical records. 
 
At each time point (pre-operatively, post-operative, 6 weeks after surgery, 6 months after surgery, and 1 
year after surgery), a semi-structured qualitative interview will be conducted by a trained interviewer 
who is not a member of the clinical staff. Interview guides were developed in consultation with clinical 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 15 of 34 
staff and piloted prior to use; guides include both prompted and unprompted open-ended questions 
aimed at understanding patient experience with various components of thyroid cancer treatment and 
subsequent care.  All interviews will be transcribed verbatim and any identifiers will be removed from 
transcripts prior to coding. Data will be coded using a catalogue of focused codes developed through 
analysis of emergent themes in a representative subset of interview transcripts. Qualitative Health 
Research Consultants (QHRC), a NIH approved subcontract consisting of Dr. Cameron Macdonald, Dr. 
Jason Orne, and their employees, will assist with data collection and analysis associated with qualitative 
aims.  
 
Patients will also be contacted after their one year study time point to complete an electronic 
questionnaire about their study participation for the purposes of quality improvement, to better 
understand patient’s perceptions of their participation in a clinical trial, and to give patients to 
opportunity to receive updates on study-related research in the future.  
 
Additionally, we would like to use the coded transcripts from the interviews to customize Natural 
Language Processing (NLP) tools; Doing this will provide a usable training dataset from coded quality of 
life (QOL) surveys that the patients completed on the day of each interview. We will train NLP 
algorithms to turn patient narratives (transcribed interview text) into quality of life measures.  That is, 
we aim to predict how a person would fill out a given quality of life survey tool based on their interview 
text.  The following describes the development process:  
 
1. The interview recordings will be transcribed by trained transcriptionists employed through the 
Wisconsin Surgical Outcomes Research Program (WiSOR) or an outside contractor with a business 
associate agreement that has been approved by UW Legal Services/Privacy Officer for HIPAA 
compliance. Transcriptionists have been instructed to remove identifying information from the 
transcripts.  The audio recordings and transcripts will be shared through a secure server that only the 
transcriptionists and study team members have access to.   
 
2. The completed interview transcripts will be stored on the secure network within the Wisconsin 
Surgical Outcomes Research Program (WiSOR).  The main levels of security for this data application 
server housed at the SMPH Computer Center include: being securely located behind the UW-Madison 
campus firewall; having data directory access controls; having physical server security; and having virtual 
server security.  The participants’ names and identifying information will be stored separately from the 
interview transcripts.  The only link between the transcripts and the identifying information will be a 
subject identification number contained in both data files. 
 
3. The transcripts will be reviewed and patient narratives pertinent to quality of life will be extracted. 
 
4. Natural language processing (NLP) tools will be used to parse the patient narratives and extract 
quality of life measures.  A variety of parsing and machine learning strategies will be employed to 
maximize accuracy. Collaborators in the Department of Journalism and Mass Communications will assist 
with the development of these tools. All resulting data files will be stored on  secure and encrypted 
servers. 
 
5. The accuracy of the NLP tools will be evaluated by comparing computer generated quality of life 
responses to the actual patient responses and collected QoL surveys 
 
6. The NLP tools will be customized as needed to make extraction as accurate as possible.  Again, a 
variety of software packages and/or machine learning programming will be employed.  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 16 of 34 
 
4. Study population 
 
4.1. 
Inclusion criteria 
Each patient must meet all of the following inclusion criteria to be enrolled in the study.  
1. Pre-operative diagnosis or suspicion of papillary thyroid cancer, usually by FNA 
2. No pre-operative evidence of cervical lymph node metastases on neck ultrasound 
(Randomization arms ONLY) 
3. No evidence of distant metastases  
4. Age 21-73 years 
5. Ability to read and write in English 
 
4.2. 
Exclusion criteria 
Patients meeting any of the following exclusion criteria are not to be enrolled in the study. 
1. Largest papillary thyroid carcinoma <1 cm in size on ultrasound 
2. Previous thyroid surgery 
3. Concurrent active malignancy of another type 
4. Age <21 or >73 years 
5. Inability to give informed consent or lacks decision making capacity  
6. T4 tumor 
7. Pre-existing vocal cord paralysis 
8. Chronic neurologic condition which affects voice or swallow (for instance, multiple sclerosis or 
Parkinson disease) 
9. Baseline laryngeal pathology that would warrant intervention that could affect voice or swallow 
function 
10. Becomes pregnant before surgery or at any time while on study  
 
4.3. 
Intra-operation exclusion criteria (Randomization arms ONLY) 
1. Evidence of nodal involvement identified in the OR 
2. Failure to confirm diagnosis of cancer in participant  
 
4.4. 
Protected populations 
We will not be including any vulnerable populations, such as children, prisoners, those without decision 
making capacity or women known to be pregnant in this study. 
 
5. Trial interventions 
The intervention portion of this study is the assignment to Treatment Arm 1 (no CND) or Treatment Arm 
2 (CND).  SOC arm patients will not undergo any specific treatment intervention. 
 
5.1. 
Treatment Arm 1 (No CND) 
Arm 1: total thyroidectomy alone. 
 
5.2. 
Treatment Arm 2 (CND) 
Arm 2: total thyroidectomy with ipsilateral prophylactic CND 
 
5.3. 
Treatment Arm 3 ( SOC) 
Arm 3: no specific trial intervention, treated as per patient and physician preference 
 
5.4. 
Allocation to intervention 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 17 of 34 
Patient allocation will be randomized by using a permuted block randomization stratified by age (≥ or < 
age 45) as the staging of thyroid cancer is different based on patient age, and tumor size (T1-T2 vs. T3) 
as the benefit of prophylactic central neck dissection may be greater in patients with T3 tumors. We 
have no predefined recruitment goal for participants ≥ or < age 45. For tumor size we would like to 
recruit 25% of patients with T3 tumors (size > 4 cm or minimal extrathyroidal extension); this is 
estimated to be 25% of our eligible population, so we believe that this goal is achievable. Randomization 
will occur on the day of surgery in the operating room after confirming no suspicious adenopathy and 
will only be known by the operating surgeon. Participants will be blinded to their treatment allocation 
until their 2-week follow up appointment at which time their pathology report will be reviewed and they 
will be told of their treatment allocation. 
 
6. Participant recruitment and consent 
 
6.1. 
Participant identification 
We will recruit patients from the University of Wisconsin Endocrine Surgery and Otolaryngology Clinics. 
We will also promote the study to endocrinologists throughout the state, specifically targeting 
endocrinologists in areas with a greater proportion of underrepresented minorities than found in the 
Madison area. We have well established referral patterns from Winnebago County, IL, which has a 
significantly higher proportion of underrepresented minority patients than Dane County where our 
institution is based. 
 
We will work closely with referring endocrinologists to perform the needed long-term follow up for the 
participants in the study. We will try to condense all study visits to 4 time points, which are already 
established for routine clinical follow up. Because participation in the study will require additional time 
at these appointments we will provide a small monetary reimbursement for participation in each of the 
study visits ($20). The cost of all study procedures that are not the standard of care will be covered as 
part of participation in the clinical trial.  
 
6.2. 
Screening 
A member of the study staff will assess patient eligibility using the Prepatory to Research provision, as 
approved by the institutional review board (IRB). All protected health information used during the 
screening process of a potential participant will be the minimum necessary for the conduct of this study. 
Any protected information recorded will be destroyed at the end of the screening process. The clinical 
care team of the potential participant will be aware of the potential participation in this study as they 
will be the ones who refer the participant.  
 
After consent is obtained, if any pre-operative procedures were not captured in the medical record, 
these will be conducted as necessary per standard of care prior to surgery. The study team will record 
the necessary data from these standard of care procedures. 
 
A participant is enrolled prior to surgery and will undergo baseline testing of voice and swallow5 function 
and QOL assessment.  They will be randomized during surgery after confirmation that there is no 
evidence of nodal involvement. 
 
6.3. 
Recruitment and consent 
The human subjects participating in this study will be recruited from the University of Wisconsin 
Endocrine Surgery and Otolaryngology Clinics as well as patients referred to the clinic by regional 
endocrinologists. A participant’s decision whether or not to participate will not affect the care he or she 
receives as a patient. Participants will be treated according to the standard of care for their disease until 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 18 of 34 
consent for the study is obtained. Participants must meet inclusion and exclusion criteria as listed above. 
Participants will be selected without consideration of socio-economic background or insurance status. 
 
Following explanation of the consent form, each potential participant will be given an opportunity to 
read it thoroughly. Before being allowed to sign the consent form, potential participants also will be 
given an opportunity to ask questions. The investigator will emphasize the fact that the participant can 
terminate involvement at any time without any consequences. Once the consent form has been signed, 
the study pre-operative procedures will be performed if not already captured in the medical record. 
 
7. Activities and measurements 
Enrollment: Participants will be enrolled after signing the informed consent form.   
 
Pre-operative visit: The pre-operative visit will include a study-required baseline assessment of every 
participant’s voice and swallow5 function and a QOL survey.  A baseline assessment of vocal function will 
be considered clinically indicated in those patients with existing voice complaints or prior neck surgery.  
If patients are found to have some abnormality on their vocal evaluation that would warrant 
intervention, they will not proceed to randomization. These pre-operative study evaluations will be 
coordinated with the standard collection of the participant’s pre-operative medical history, physical 
exam, and laboratory evaluation. 
 
Day of surgery:  Once the surgeon visually confirms there is no evidence of nodal involvement 
intraoperatively, the participant will be randomized.  Study arm randomization will be computer 
generated by Dr. Glen Leverson of the UW Department of Surgery Biostatistics Office and 
communicated to the surgeon via sealed envelope.  Participants will be blinded to their treatment arm 
until the Day 12 visit. 
 
Post-operative care in hospital: After surgery, participants will remain in the hospital overnight per 
surgeon preference and laboratory evaluations will be performed per standard of care. 
   
Post-operative Day 1: The participant will be educated on the signs and symptoms of hypocalcemia and 
be given detailed instruction on how to treat these symptoms per standard of care.  They will be given a 
study log to fill out which will allow them to record the frequency and severity of symptoms and the 
number of doses of calcium taken.  This will be completed and returned to study staff at the Day 12 visit.  
 
Day 12 visit:  Physical and laboratory evaluations will be performed per standard of care.  A 
comprehensive voice and swallow5 evaluation will be conducted; this will be considered a research 
procedure unless the participant is experiencing difficulty swallowing or there is evidence of vocal fold 
dysfunction.  The participant will also complete a QOL survey and participate in a qualitative interview 
per study protocol.  
 
Week 6 visit: 48 hours prior to the Week 6 visit day, participants will have a blood sample drawn to 
establish post-operative thyroglobulin levels and assess response to treatment. During the visit, 
participants will complete QoL surveys and participate in a qualitative interview. If the patient’s voice or 
swallow function was impaired at the Day 12 visit, additional voice and swallow5 evaluations will also be 
performed.  
At this time the treating endocrinologist will assess the subject’s risk profile based on the criteria 
outlined in section 3 of the protocol. If the patient is classified as intermediate- or high-risk or if the 
patient is classified as low-risk but chooses to undergo RAI remnant ablation, he or she will be treated 
according to the following standard schedule:  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 19 of 34 
 
Day 1: rTSH injection 
 
Day 2: rTSH injection 
 
Day 3: 50 mCu I-131 therapy administered2 
 
Day 5: Stimulated thyroglobulin lab  
 
Day 5-17: Whole Body Scan performed  
 
Month 6 visit: Physical and laboratory evaluations, as well as an ultrasound of the neck, will be 
performed per standard of care.  PTH and calcium samples required for the study will be drawn at this 
time.  A QOL survey and qualitative interview will be completed.  If the patients’ voice or swallow 
function was impaired at the Week 6 visit, additional voice and swallow5 evaluations will also be 
performed. 
 
1 Year visit: Patients will receive a neck ultrasound and labs per standard of care. If a patient underwent 
RAI remnant ablation, a stimulated thyroglobulin level after rTSH administration will be obtained to 
assess response to therapy. A QOL survey and qualitative interview will be completed.  If the patients’ 
voice or swallow5 function was impaired at the Month 6 visit, additional voice and swallow evaluations 
will also be performed. 
 
Follow-up: Patients will receive a quality improvement follow-up survey between 1 and 6 weeks after 
the completion of their last study activity. Patients who meet criteria for long term follow-up will 
continue to be followed through chart review and the endocrine surgery outcomes database. 
 
Time required for study procedures: 
120 minutes for voice and swallow evaluation3, 5 
 
 
 
 
 
15-30 minutes for QOL survey 
 
 
 
 
 
60-90 minutes for qualitative interview 
 
7.1. 
Table: Time points for data collection 
 
 
 
Time Points for Data Collection 
Variable 
Unit 
Pre 
Post-Op 
Day 1 
Post-Op 
2 Weeks 
Post-Op 6 
Weeks 
Post-Op 
6 Mo 
Post-Op 
12 Mo 
 
Phonation Threshold Pressure 
mmHg or 
cmH20 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Dysphonia Symptom Index 
Score 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Global Dysphonia 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Rough 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Breathy 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Strain 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
                                                 
 
2 Since no patient will have significant nodal involvement, low-dose ablation should be appropriate for all patients. No RAI will 
be required for participants determined to be low-risk 
3 If voice and swallow are normal at any post-op visit, then evaluations will not be performed at subsequent follow up time 
points. 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 20 of 34 
 
 
Time Points for Data Collection 
Variable 
Unit 
Pre 
Post-Op 
Day 1 
Post-Op 
2 Weeks 
Post-Op 6 
Weeks 
Post-Op 
6 Mo 
Post-Op 
12 Mo 
 
CAPE-V Pitch 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Loudness 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
CAPE-V Other 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
GRBAS Grade 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
GRBAS Rough 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
GRBAS Breathy 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
GRBAS Asthenia 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
GRBAS Strain 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Stroboscopy Edge Left & Right 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Stroboscopy Phase Symmetry 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Stroboscopy Amplitude, L & R 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Stroboscopy Vibratory 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Glottal Function Index 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
Penetration Aspiration Scale1 
Rating 
X 
 
X 
Performed only if prior exam is 
abnormal 
SF-12 MCS 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
SF-12 PCS 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
EAT-10 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
EORTC QLQ-30 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
THYCA-Qol 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Voice Handicap Index Total 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Voice Handicap Index Function 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Voice Handicap Index Emotion 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Voice Handicap Index Physical 
Score 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Interview 
Codes, 
Themes 
X 
 
X 
X 
X 
X 
Calcium 
Lab 
X 
X 
X 
 
X 
Performed 
only if 
month 6 
value is 
abnormal 
PTH 
Lab 
X 
X 
X 
 
X 
Performed 
only if 
month 6 
value is 
abnormal 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 21 of 34 
 
 
Time Points for Data Collection 
Variable 
Unit 
Pre 
Post-Op 
Day 1 
Post-Op 
2 Weeks 
Post-Op 6 
Weeks 
Post-Op 
6 Mo 
Post-Op 
12 Mo 
 
Vitamin D (if PTH is high) 
Lab 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Neck ultrasound  
Imaging 
X 
 
 
 
X 
X 
FNA result 
Lab 
X 
 
 
 
 
 
Hypocalcemia symptom log 
Rating 
 
 
X 
 
 
 
TSH & repeat TSH (if needed) 
Lab 
 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
Radioactive Iodine scan dose and 
scan results (randomized 
patients only) 
Imaging 
 
 
 
X4 
 
If 
indicated 
clinically 
Unstimulated Tg level 
Lab 
 
 
 
X 
X 
X 
Stimulated Tg level 
Lab 
 
 
 
X5 
 
X5 
 
7.2. 
Blood sample collection 
For patients enrolled in the randomization arm, blood drawn for research purposes will be collected at 
the patient’s standard of care blood draws whenever possible, which should result in only one additional 
venipuncture being necessary (at the Week 6 visit).  Lab results from the research samples will be 
entered into the patient’s chart and reported to the patient.  About 15 mL (one tablespoon) of 
additional blood will be taken; no research samples will be saved or banked for future testing. No 
additional blood for research purposes only will be drawn from patients enrolled in the standard of care 
arm. 
 
7.3. 
Data entry 
Data will be collected electronically and on paper. The following will be captured electronically: (1) data 
from the electronic medical record (see data collection sheet); (2) voice and swallow evaluation video 
and audio recordings and clinician reports/summaries; (3) audio recordings of participant interviews and 
electronic codes for content themes. Paper data collection will consist of the QOL instruments (SF12, 
EAT-10, EORTC, ThyCa-QOL, and VHI).  Raw data will be scored or otherwise evaluated as necessary and 
entered into a study-specific Microsoft Access database as soon as possible after data collection. 
 
Voice and videostroboscopy recordings collected during this study may not be immediately destroyed 
after all research procedures have been completed, as this data could be of value to a follow up or 
related study. IRB approval will be sought for any use of this data outside of the study parameters 
described in this protocol. 
 
7.4. 
Participant withdrawals 
Participants have the right to withdraw from the study at any time for any reason, either before or after 
the surgical procedure.  Additionally, any participant may be discontinued from the study at any time at 
the discretion of the investigator if she feels it is in the best interest of the participant.  If a participant 
withdraws or is withdrawn from one aim (i.e. voice and swallow), they may continue to participate in 
the other aims.   
 
Study participation may be terminated early under the following circumstances:  
                                                 
 
 If voice and swallow are normal at any post-op visit, then evaluations will not be performed at subsequent follow up time 
points. 
remnant ablation at Week 6 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 22 of 34 
(1) the participant does not meet all inclusion criteria and is deemed a screen failure 
(2) the participant meets any of the exclusion criteria (including intra-operative criteria) and is 
deemed a screen failure 
(3) the participant does not adhere to protocol requirements (e.g., completing QOL questionnaires 
or the Symptom Log, refusing permission to have interview recorded, etc.) 
(4) the participant experiences an AE which in the investigator’s opinion requires their withdrawal 
from the study6 
(5) the participant is lost to follow up 
(6) death of the participant 
 
The investigator will document the reason(s) for withdrawal of each participant in source documents 
and in the eCRF.   
 
Participants that withdraw or are withdrawn prior to Day 12 will be replaced.  Their pre-operative data 
may be used to establish baseline function for comparison.  Participants that withdraw from any aspect 
of the study will continue to be cared for per the standard of care.  
 
7.5. 
Stopping rules (By the Data Safety and Monitoring Committee) 
The DSMC shall have authority to stop a research protocol in progress and remove individual human 
participants from a research protocol. The Data Safety and Monitoring Committee may request 
enrollment be suspended due to safety concerns.  
 
8. Data analysis and statistical considerations 
 
8.1. 
Sample size determination 
At the beginning of this study, we anticipated randomizing 140 patients with clinically node negative 
thyroid cancer, with the goal of 116 participants completing the study. Patients will be recruited from 
the Endocrine Surgery and Otolaryngology Clinics at the University of Wisconsin Hospitals and Clinics. 
This is a high volume tertiary care center with a large thyroid practice, performing approximately 350 
thyroid operations per year. Thyroid cancer accounts for 30% of thyroidectomy cases at our institution 
and this is the pool from which the patients will be identified (approximately 105 patients/year). 
Approximately 15% of thyroid cancer cases will have a positive pre-operative ultrasound, thus 
decreasing our pool of eligible participants to approximately 89 patients per year. With an accrual goal 
of 140 participants within 4 years, we would need to recruit 39% of eligible patients each year. 
 
Permanent complications in thyroid surgery are uncommon, but these complications can be disastrous 
for a patient that is affected. Permanent hypoparathyroidism occurs in 1-2% of patients after a total 
thyroidectomy and the risk may be as high as 14% when a CND is performed. The best surrogate marker 
to predict an increase in permanent morbidity is the incidence of transient hypoparathyroidism, which is 
substantially more common than permanent hypoparathyroidism. For example, transient 
hypoparathyroidism occurred in 12% of our last 270 patients undergoing a total thyroidectomy. The rate 
of transient hypoparathyroidism in patients treated with a CND has been shown in the literature to be 
significantly higher. The rate of transient hypoparathyroidism in recent large retrospective studies was 
reported to be between 38-51%. 
 
We assumed a power of 0.8 and an alpha of 0.05. For sample size calculations we made the assumption 
that the incidence of transient hypoparathyroidism after a total thyroidectomy alone is 12% and that an 
increase to 36% (or tripling of the risk) is clinically significant. The rate of hypoparathyroidism in Arm 1 is 
based upon our last 270 patients and is a reliable estimate. The incidence in the CND arm is based on a 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 23 of 34 
review of the literature and we purposely chose a number on the lower end of quoted ranges to ensure 
that we are not underestimating our sample size. With these assumptions the sample size is 116, with 
58 patients per arm. Due to the short follow up for our primary endpoint (post-operative day 1) and for 
our secondary endpoints (<12 months), we anticipate no significant loss to follow up. For our secondary 
aims, we chose the Dysphonia Severity Index (DSI) as representative and found a prior thyroid surgery 
study (45) showing that as few as 8 patients in a negative voice outcome group were sufficient to detect 
clinically meaningful differences on this measure versus patients with normal vocal functioning at 6 
months post-op. Thus, the sample size in our study should be adequate to address our secondary aims 
even if there is attrition/ loss to follow-up. 
 
The number of patients who must be consented will be larger than the final sample size because a 
portion of patients that are enrolled and evaluated pre-operatively may not be randomized the day of 
surgery (because malignancy is not proven intraoperatively, suspicious adenopathy is identified, or there 
is gross local invasion). We aim to increase the sample size by 20% to accommodate for this.  
 
We have found in our examination of preliminary data that our objective measures are not effectively 
capturing the impact of surgery on patients and that the most critical and meaningful data that we are 
obtaining from our study is from the in-depth patient interviews. Given the value of our qualitative data, 
we need to ensure that we are capturing adequate qualitative data to identify differences between the 
objective and patient-reported evaluations of experiences with hypocalcemia and voice and swallowing 
problems caused by transient or permanent nerve injury. Ultimately, we plan to make our existing study 
aims even more robust by incorporating both objective and subjective data into each of our primary and 
secondary outcomes measures. 
 
Based on our experience with qualitative research and the rates of objective complications in the 
patients enrolled to date, we’ve determined that we need to enroll at least 62 patients in order to 
obtain an adequate dataset to examine the impact of hypocalcemia and 70 patients in order to obtain 
an adequate dataset to examine the impact of vocal cord dysfunction. While we will continue to recruit 
as many patients as feasible, based on these calculations, if we are able to enroll at least 70 patients, 
this should give us the data necessary to evaluate all of our study aims. 
 
Therefore, we will plan to randomize 70 - 140 patients. We will plan to recruit patients up until year 5 of 
the study as the primary recurrence endpoint will be at 1 year. Given the fact that we anticipate having 
at least 89 eligible patients per year, we should meet our recruitment goal while allowing for at least 1 
year of follow up in all study patients. 
 
8.2. 
Analysis of endpoints 
For all primary aims, data will be analyzed using a mixed model two-way analysis of variance examining 
the effects of treatment group, time and factor interactions, such as radioactive iodine dose. Evaluation 
time periods (pre-surgery, Day 12, Week 6, Month 6, and 1 Year) will serve as between subjects factor 
and treatment group (prophylactic CND versus no CND) will serve as the between subjects factor. 
Experiment-wise error will be controlled with an appropriate adjustment to the alpha-level. Prior to 
each analysis, we will plot all data and carefully examine each analysis to ascertain that the assumptions 
of ANOVA are not violated. Data will be transformed as necessary to better conform to the assumptions. 
Nonparametric statistics will be used when assumptions for ANOVA are not achieved. Statistical support 
for the study design and analysis will be performed by Dr. Glen Leverson who will perform analyses with 
SAS statistical software (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC). 
 
9. Risks and benefits of trial participation  

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 24 of 34 
 
9.1. 
Potential risks 
Risks associated with surgical procedures 
The two surgical approaches to be compared are both widely adopted as standard of care for the 
treatment of thyroid cancer. There are risks to these surgical procedures and the risks include injury to 
the recurrent laryngeal or superior laryngeal nerves leading to decrements in voice and swallow 
function, injury to the parathyroid glands leading to transient or permanent hypocalcemia, bleeding, and 
infection.  The risks of both surgical arms are the same, but the frequency may be higher in one arm 
versus another and this is the primary aim of this study.  
 
Risks associated with lab testing 
Much of the testing and post-operative monitoring included in this project is considered the standard of 
care in the treatment of thyroid cancer and there is no added risk to participating in this study for the 
participants. These tests include: lab testing, pre-operative and post-operative ultrasound, thyroid 
hormone replacement at suppressive doses, and radioactive iodine ablation.  
 
Risks associated with videofluoroscopic (VF) swallow study5  
There are some small risks associated with the videofluoroscopic (VF) swallow study and the complete 
voice evaluations. However, these evaluations are considered routine evaluation method for patients 
with voice and swallowing disorders and thus can be considered minimal risk. That is, the probability 
and magnitude of harm or discomfort anticipated with these evaluations are not greater in and of 
themselves than those ordinarily encountered in daily life or during the performance of routine physical 
or psychological examinations or tests (45 CFR 46.102). 
 
With VF there are small levels of radiation exposure. The UW-IRB has previously determined that prior 
research from our department involving VF is minimal risk. Participants will likely be exposed to 
radiation from the fluoroscopy unit for approximately 240 seconds. According to dose-area product 
measurements, a standard videofluoroscopic evaluation yields an average effective dose to the patient 
of 0.85 mSv, which is considered a low associated risk (1/16,000). Participation in this study does not 
prevent the participant from undergoing any medical procedure that would require further exposure to 
X-ray. Bolus volumes to be used are considered safe even in severely dysphagic patients and all 
participants will be carefully observed in the controlled radiology environment 
 
Potential risks of the VF swallow study include gagging, choking, and fainting. There is minimal 
discomfort and minimal risk associated with the endoscopy procedures used during the evaluations. The 
rigid endoscope is simply inserted into the mouth, without the need for any topical anesthesia. It is 
possible that the participant may feel a slight amount of anxiety due to having something placed into 
his/her mouth, although in our experience this is very rare. There may be discomfort with the face mask 
or feelings of unease or anxiety during the airflow recordings due to the facemask or the tube in the 
participant’s mouth. The likelihood of these risks occurring is small and further reduced by providing the 
participants adequate time to rest between tasks. Medical staff will be immediately on hand in our 
hospital setting if these events should occur. 
 
Risks associated with psychological stress 
Participants will be discussing their experiences and any adverse outcomes they have experienced in the 
post-operative period.  This may cause changes in thought processes and emotion.  These changes will 
mostly be transitory; however they may be recurrent, or even permanent.   
 
Risks associated with loss of confidentiality 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 25 of 34 
There is a risk that information recorded about participants will be shared with people who would not 
normally have access to this information.  
 
Risk of radioactive iodine standardization 
There is a risk that health care providers following standard of care procedures would treat a study-
eligible patient with higher doses of radioactive iodine (usually 100 mCi) than is allowed under this 
protocol.  This theoretical under treatment could possibly contribute to a recurrence or persistence of 
the original disease, requiring either additional surgery or radioactive iodine treatment(s) in the future. 
If there are concerns about the dosing of radioactive iodine the case will be presented at our 
multidisciplinary tumor board and a joint decision made by all providers whether it is appropriate for the 
patient to remain on the protocol or not and this will be communicated to the patient so they can 
decide how they would like to proceed.  
 
Unknown risks 
This study may involve risks to the participant which are currently unforeseeable. We will inform 
participants as soon as possible if we discover any information that may affect the participant's health, 
welfare, or decision to be in this study. 
 
9.2. 
Mitigation of potential risks 
Mitigation of risks associated with surgical procedures 
The risks associated with the surgical procedures are clinical risks not specific to the research because 
participants are receiving surgery due to clinical necessity and both types of surgery are considered 
standard of care. These risks are described in detail to the patient as part of the informed consent 
process for surgery and the risks are the same for both proposed procedures, although the magnitude of 
the risk may be different. While inclusion of a prophylactic CND may increase the risks of surgery it also 
may provide a clinical benefit to the patient by decreasing the risk of recurrence. This is one of the issues 
to be examined in the proposed research. 
 
Mitigation of risks associated with lab testing 
The risks of these tests are clinical risks and not research risks. The PI will be aware of the clinical risks 
and these risks will be explained to the patient as part of the informed consent process. 
 
Mitigation of risks associated with videofluoroscopic (VF) swallow study5  
The likelihood of these risks occurring is small and further reduced by providing the participants 
adequate time to rest between tasks. Medical staff will be immediately on hand in our hospital setting if 
these events should occur. 
 
Mitigation of risks associated with psychological stress 
The participant showing signs of psychological stress will be reminded of the voluntary nature of the 
clinical trial they are participating in, and that they can stop at any time without punishment or loss of 
care.  The Primary Investigator will be made aware of any participants displaying these signs by the 
research staff, and will refer them to appropriate resources as needed. 
 
Mitigation of risks associated with loss of confidentiality 
All information obtained and associated data files will be confidential and will be kept in a locked file or 
password protected computer. The risk of breach of confidentiality regarding participation in the study 
outside of the scope of the research will be handled by carefully controlling access to study data only to 
personnel on the research team. 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 26 of 34 
Confidentiality will be protected further by: (1) using a participant log form that contains only the 
minimum necessary protected health information (PHI) concerning participants, and storing this log in a 
locked area when not in use, (2) not sharing PHI with any outside institution, (3) coding data collection 
forms with a consecutive participant number that is not derived from any participant personal 
identifiers, and linking that data collection form to the participant log, and (4) storing the participant log 
and data collection forms separately. 
 
 It is highly likely that these measures will result in avoidance of breach of confidentiality outside of the 
research. In addition, the data to be collected are not sensitive to participants. A data and safety 
monitoring board will also be in place. 
 
Mitigation of risks of radioactive iodine standardization 
It is not clinically possible to know if a recurrence was due either completely (or in part) to the slightly 
lower dose of radioactive iodine.  All participants will be followed rigorously according to current 
guidelines, and if recurrence or persistence occurs, detection of the disease at an early stage will 
facilitate appropriate treatment. 
 
9.3. 
Potential benefits and risk-to-benefit ratio 
Potential benefits to the individual participant 
Individual benefits to participants are not guaranteed, as this study is seeking to determine which of the 
two accepted standard of care treatments participants could receive will yield the best clinical benefits. 
We do not anticipate any direct benefits to participants as a result of the evaluation of natural language 
processing of patient interview narratives. 
 
Potential benefit to society 
Over 60,000 thyroid operations are done each year in the United States for the treatment of thyroid 
cancer. By following the ATA recommendations and changing the recommended surgical approach from 
a total thyroidectomy to a total thyroidectomy with a prophylactic CND this would alter the treatment of 
over 50,000 patients each year. Many practitioners have already adopted this change in practice without 
solid evidence to support it. In order to ensure that this change in practice does not lead to a significant 
increase in potentially devastating morbidity, it is essential that we clarify the true risks of this 
intervention in a systematic fashion. Enhancing our understanding of the risks and benefits of a 
prophylactic CND will help us to improve the care of patients diagnosed with thyroid cancer by 
minimizing morbidity and ensuring the efficacy of our treatments. 
 
In addition, our unique qualitative data analysis, including evaluating the use of natural language 
processing, could potentially lead to the development of a novel way for clinicians and researchers to 
measure quality of life in patient populations. The specialized natural language processing tools 
developed through this project could be used to more easily extract quality of life information from 
health-related social media sites and electronic health resources. This could lead to more patient-
centered care. It could also reduce the need to administer structured quality of life surveys, which can 
be time-consuming and may miss important quality of life indicators that may come out in an 
unstructured patient narrative. 
 
Risk-to-benefit ratio 
Although individual benefits to participants are not guaranteed, it is anticipated that considerable 
societal benefit will result from the proposed studies. Currently both surgical approaches proposed are 
accepted standards of care. While the risks associated with a CND may be higher, that risk is offset by a 
potential clinical benefit to the patient. The reason this study is essential is that currently the evidence 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 27 of 34 
cannot support one treatment over another and therefore we feel that this study has true equipoise. 
The results of this study can be used to help guide the treatment of thyroid cancer and help provide 
solid evidence to support future guidelines. 
 
10. Adverse events and unanticipated problems 
 
10.1. 
Adverse event definitions 
Adverse event (AE) 
An adverse event is defined as any untoward or unfavorable medical occurrence in a human participant 
including any abnormal sign, symptom, or disease temporally associated with the participant's 
participation in the research, whether or not considered related to the participant's participation in the 
research. Adverse event collection will begin at Day of Operation and continue through the last 
assessments. Untoward medical occurrences or acute conditions that occur between screening and 
surgery will be recorded as medical history. 
 
Serious adverse event (SAE) 
A serious adverse event is defined as any adverse event that meets one of the following criteria: 
• 
Results in death; OR 
• 
Is life-threatening; OR 
• 
Requires hospitalization or prolongs existing hospitalization; OR 
• 
Results in significant or persistent disability or incapacity; OR 
• 
Results in a congenital anomaly/birth defect; OR  
 
Unanticipated problem (UP) 
An unanticipated problem is defined as an event that meets all of the following criteria: 
(1) unexpected in severity, nature, or frequency given the research procedures and the 
characteristics of the participant population (i.e., problems that are not described in this 
protocol or other study documents); AND 
(2) related or possible related to participation in the research; AND 
(3) suggests that research places participants or others at a greater risk of harm related to the 
research than was previously known or recognized.  
 
10.2. 
Severity assessment 
The severity of all adverse events will be assessed according to the following scale: 
• 
Mild = does not interfere with the participant’s usual function 
• 
Moderate = interferes to some extent with the participant’s usual function 
• 
Severe = interferes significantly with the participant’s usual function 
 
10.3. 
Causality assessment 
The PI will determine the relationship of adverse events to the research intervention using the following 
scale: 
• 
Definite = AE is clearly related to the study procedures 
• 
Probable = AE is likely related to the study procedures 
• 
Possible = AE is possibly related to the study procedures 
• 
Unlikely = AE is doubtfully related to the study procedures 
• 
Unrelated = AE is clearly not related to the study procedures 
 
10.4. 
Procedures for recording and reporting adverse events 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 28 of 34 
All adverse events will be recorded for the duration of participation in the study, which is 1 year post 
treatment.  Since the adverse events being tracked are associated with both treatment arms, it will be 
difficult to know if the adverse event is truly related to the intervention of not. The frequency of events 
will be monitored bi-annually by the DSMC.  Ongoing study-related risks to patients include: the 
qualitative interviews; QOL surveys; and the voice and swallow5 assessment(s).  It is anticipated that 
there will be very few adverse events attributable to this follow up care.  
 
Adverse events recording will cease after patients’ final study visits at 1 year post treatment, i.e. these 
events will not be tracked during long term recurrence follow up.  
 
 
11. Trial safety monitoring  
 
11.1. 
Data Safety Monitoring Committee 
Oversight and Monitoring Plan 
The UWCCC Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) is responsible for the regular review and 
monitoring of all ongoing clinical research in the UWCCC.  A summary of DSMC activities are as follows: 
• 
Reviews all clinical trials conducted at the UWCCC for subject safety, protocol compliance, 
and data integrity 
• 
Reviews all Serious Adverse Events (SAE) requiring expedited reporting, as defined in the 
protocol, for all clinical trials conducted at the UWCCC, and studies conducted at external 
sites for which UWCCC acts as an oversight body 
• 
Reviews all reports generated through the UWCCC DSMS elements (Internal Audits, Quality 
Assurance Reviews, Response Reviews, Compliance Reviews, and Protocol Summary 
Reports) described in Section II of this document 
• 
Notifies the protocol Principal Investigator of DSMC decisions and, if applicable, any 
requirements for corrective action related to data or safety issues 
• 
Notifies the CRC of DSMC decisions and any correspondence from the DSMC to the protocol 
Principal Investigator 
• 
Works in conjunction with the UW Health Sciences IRB in the review of relevant safety 
information as well as protocol deviations, non-compliance, and unanticipated problems 
reported by the UWCCC research staff 
• 
Ensures that notification is of SAEs requiring expedited reporting is provided to external 
sites participating in multi-institutional clinical trials coordinated by the UWCCC 
 
Monitoring and Reporting Guidelines 
UWCCC quality assurance and monitoring activities are determined by study sponsorship and risk level 
of the protocol as determined by the PRMC.  All protocols (including Intervention Trials, Non-
Intervention Trials, Behavioral and Nutritional Studies, and trials conducted under a Training Grant) are 
evaluated by the PRMC at the time of committee review.  UWCC monitoring requirements for trials 
without an acceptable external DSMB are as follows: 
 
Intermediate Monitoring 
Protocols subject to intermediate monitoring generally include UW Institutional Phase I/II and Phase II 
Trials. These protocols undergo review of subject safety at regularly scheduled DOWG meetings where 
the results of each subject’s treatment are discussed and the discussion is documented in the DOWG 
                                                 
 
5 Swallow evaluations were discontinued for patients enrolled after 12/01/2016 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 29 of 34 
meeting minutes. The discussion includes the number of subjects enrolled, significant toxicities, dose 
adjustments, and responses observed. Protocol Summary Reports are submitted on a semi-annual basis 
by the study team for review by the DSMC. 
 
11.2. 
Review and oversight requirements 
Serious Adverse Event – reported within 24 hours 
Serious Adverse Events requiring reporting within 24 hours (as described in the protocol) must also be 
reported to the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) Chair via an email to 
saenotify@uwcarbone.wisc.edu within one business day.  The OnCore SAE Details Report must be 
submitted along with other report materials as appropriate (NCI AdEERS form or FDA Medwatch Form 
#3500 and/or any other documentation available at that time of initial reporting). The DSMC Chair will 
review the information and determine if immediate action is required. Within 10 working days, all 
available subsequent SAE documentation must be submitted electronically along with a 24 hour follow-
up SAE Details Report and a completed UWCCC SAE Routing Form to saenotify@uwcarbone.wisc.edu. 
All information is entered and tracked in the UWCCC database. 
 
The Principal Investigator notifies all investigators involved with the study at the UWCCC, the IRB, and 
the funding agency and provides documentation of these notifications to the DSMC. 
 
If the SAE occurs on a clinical trial in which the UW PI serves as the sponsor-investigator, the PI reviews 
the event to determine whether the SAE requires reporting to the FDA and other participating 
investigators.   
 
See Section 11.3 for detailed instructions on SAE reporting. 
 
Serious Adverse Event – Reported within 10 Days 
Serious Adverse Events requiring reporting within 10 days (as described in the protocol) must also be 
reported to the Data and Safety Monitoring Committee (DSMC) Chair via an email to 
saenotify@uwcarbone.wisc.edu.  The OnCore SAE Details Report must be submitted along with other 
report materials as appropriate (NCI AdEERS form or FDA Medwatch Form #3500 and/or any other 
documentation available at that time of initial reporting). The DSMC Chair will review the information 
and determine if further action is required. All information is entered and tracked in the UWCCC 
database. 
 
The Principal Investigator notifies all investigators involved with the study at the UWCCC, the IRB, the 
sponsor, and the funding agency and provides documentation of these notifications to the DSMC. 
If the SAE occurs on a clinical trial in which the UW PI serves as the sponsor-investigator, the PI reviews 
the event to determine whether the SAE requires reporting to the FDA and other participating 
investigators.   
 
See Section 11.3 for detailed instructions on SAE reporting. 
 
Study Progress Review 
Protocol Summary Reports (PSR) are required to be submitted to the DSMC in the timeframe 
determined by the risk level of the study (quarterly; semi-annually; or annually). The PSR provides a 
cumulative report of SAEs, as well as instances of non-compliance, protocol deviations, and 
unanticipated problems, toxicities and responses that have occurred on the protocol in the timeframe 
specified.  PSRs for those protocols scheduled for review are reviewed at each DSMC meeting. 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 30 of 34 
Protocol Summary Reports enable DSMC committee members to assess whether significant benefits or 
risks are occurring that would warrant study suspension or closure. This information is evaluated by the 
DSMC in conjunction with other reports of quality assurance activities (e.g., reports from Internal Audits, 
Quality Assurance Reviews, etc.) occurring since the prior review of the protocol by the DSMC.  
Additionally, the DSMC requires the study team to submit external DSMB or DSMC reports, external 
monitoring findings for industry-sponsored studies, and any other pertinent study-related information.  
 
In the event that there is significant risk warranting study suspension or closure, the DSMC will notify 
the PI of the DSMC findings and ensure the appropriate action is taken for the protocol (e.g., suspension 
or closure).  The DSMC ensures that the PI reports any temporary or permanent suspension of a clinical 
trial to the sponsor (e.g., NCI Program Director, Industry Sponsor Medical Monitor, Cooperative Group 
Study Chair, etc.) and other appropriate agencies. DSMC findings and requirements for follow-up action 
are submitted to the CRC. 
 
11.3. 
Expedited reporting of Serious Adverse Events 
Depending on the nature, severity, and attribution of the serious adverse event an SAE report will be 
phoned in, submitted in writing, or both according to Table [#] below. All serious adverse events must 
also be reported to the UWCCC Data and Safety Monitoring Committee Chair.  All serious adverse events 
must also be reported to the UW IRB (if applicable), and any sponsor/funding agency not already 
included in the list. 
 
Determine the reporting time line for the SAE in question by using the following table.  Then refer to the 
subsequent sections if the SAE occurred at the UWCCC. 
 
FDA reporting requirements for Serious Adverse Events (21 CRF Part 312)6, 7 
NOTE: Investigators MUST immediately report to the UWCCC and any other parties outlined in the 
protocol ANY Serious Adverse Events, whether or not they are considered related to the investigational 
agent(s)/intervention (21 CFR 312.64). 
 
An adverse event is considered serious if it results in ANY of the following outcomes: 
1) Death 
2) A life-threatening adverse event 
3) An adverse event that results in inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing 
hospitalization for ≥ 24 hours 
4) A persistent or significant incapacity or substantial disruption of the ability to conduct normal 
life functions 
5) A congenital anomaly/birth defect 
                                                 
 
6 Serious adverse events that occur more than 30 days after the last administration of investigational agent/intervention and 
have an attribution of possible, probable, or definite require reporting as follows: 
 
Expedited 24-hour notification followed by complete report within 5 calendar days for: 
• 
All Grade 4 and Grade 5 AEs 
 
Expedited 10 calendar day reports for: 
• 
Grade 2 adverse events resulting in hospitalization or prolongation of hospitalization 
• 
Grade 3 events 
 
7 For studies using PET or SPECT IND agents, the AE reporting period is limited to 10 radioactive half-lives, rounded UP to the 
nearest whole day, after the agent/intervention was last administered.  Footnote “1” above applies after this reporting period. 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 31 of 34 
 
Important Medical Events (IME) that may not result in death, be life threatening, or require 
hospitalization may be considered serious when, based upon medical judgment, they may jeopardize 
the patient or subject and may require medical or surgical intervention to prevent one of the outcomes 
listed in this definition (FDA, 21 CFR 312.32; ICH E2A and ICH E6) 
 
ALL SERIOUS adverse events that meet the above criteria MUST be immediately reported to the 
UWCCC within the timeframes detailed in the table below: 
 
Hospitalization 
Grade 1 
Timeframes 
Grade 2 
Timeframes 
Grade 3 
Timeframes 
Grade 4 & 5 
Timeframes 
Resulting in 
hospitalization  ≥ 24 hrs 
10 Calendar Days 
24-Hour; 5 Calendar 
Days 
Not resulting in 
Hospitalization ≥ 24 hrs 
Not required 
10 Calendar Days 
 
Expedited AE reporting timelines are defined as: 
• 
24-Hour; 5 Calendar Days – The AE must initially be reported within 24 hours of learning of 
the AE, followed by a complete expedited report within 5 calendar days of the initial 24-
hour report 
• 
10 Calendar Days – A complete expedited report on the AE must be submitted within 10 
calendar days of learning of the AE 
 
SAE requiring [24] hour reporting occurs at UWCCC: 
Report to the UWCCC: 
Reference the SAE SOP (Standard Operating Procedure) and the SAE Reporting Workflow for DOWGs on 
the UWCCC website (http://www.uwccc.wisc.edu) for specific instructions on how and what to report to 
the UWCCC for [24] hour initial and follow-up reports.  A follow-up report is required to be submitted 
within 10 days of the initial [24] hour report.   
 
For this protocol, the following UWCCC entities are required to be notified: 
(1) DSMC (saenotify@uwcarbone.wisc.edu) 
(2) UWCCC Study PI 
(3) UWCCC Treating MD 
(4) Any other appropriate parties listed on the SAE Routing Form (for follow-up reports only) 
 
Report to the IRB: 
The timing and format for submitting an AE report to the IRBs depends on whether: (a) the event 
suggests an adverse alteration in the risks to subjects or others; (b) the event is reasonably related to 
study participation; (c) the event is unexpected; (d) there is a Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) or 
Data Monitoring Committee (DMC); (e) the event occurred at sites or to subjects under UW purview; (f) 
the event results in or is expected to result in a change to the protocol, consent documents, and/or 
dissemination of new information to subjects (e.g., letter or telephone call to subjects); and (g) whether 
an investigational device is involved. 
 
Immediate Report to the IRB 
An AE, regardless of where it occurred, which meets all three of the following conditions must be 
reported to the IRB immediately: 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 32 of 34 
• 
Unexpected 
• 
Immediately life threatening or severely debilitating to other current subjects, and 
• 
Caused by or probably related to the treatment or study intervention 
 
The IRBs expect that these reports will be rare. AEs that meet these conditions must be reported to the 
IRB Chair or IRB Director via telephone as soon as possible, but no later than 1 business day after the 
local research team becomes aware of the event. The research team will then discuss with the IRB Chair 
or IRB Director what action needs to be taken related to the occurrence (e.g., suspension of study 
enrollment, change in treatment regimen) to prevent further harm from occurring. This initial report to 
the IRB Chair or IRB Director must be followed within 2 business days with a submission of an Adverse 
Event Report Form to the IRB Office. 
 
SAE requiring [10] day reporting occurs at UWCCC:  
Report to the UWCCC: 
Reference the SAE SOP and the SAE Reporting Workflow for DOWGs on the UWCCC website 
(http://www.uwccc.wisc.edu) for specific instructions on how and what to report to the UWCCC for [10] 
day reports.   
 
For this protocol, the following entities are required to be notified: 
(1) DSMC (saenotify@uwcarbone.wisc.edu) 
(2) Any other appropriate parties listed on the SAE Routing Form (for follow-up reports only) 
 
Report to the IRB: 
The timing and format for submitting an AE report to the IRBs depends on whether: (a) the event 
suggests an adverse alteration in the risks to subjects or others; (b) the event is reasonably related to 
study participation; (c) the event is unexpected; (d) there is a Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) or 
Data Monitoring Committee (DMC); (e) the event occurred at sites or to subjects under UW purview; (f) 
the event results in or is expected to result in a change to the protocol, consent documents, and/or 
dissemination of new information to subjects (e.g., letter or telephone call to subjects); and (g) whether 
an investigational device is involved. 
 
Report to the IRB within Fourteen (14) Business Days 
Any other AE as described above Adverse Events that are Reportable to the IRBs must be reported to 
the IRB within fourteen (14) business days. 
 
Report to the IRB at Continuing Review 
AEs that meet the criteria below should be reported at the time of continuing review. Events reported at 
continuing review must meet ALL of the following criteria: 
• 
occurred locally (i.e., at sites under UW IRB purview); 
• 
are related to the research study but unexpected; 
• 
were not assessed as placing subjects or others at increased risks (including physical, 
psychological, economic, or social harm) than was previously known or recognized; 
• 
were not assessed as resulting in new information that needed to be disseminated to 
participants; and 
• 
occurred on studies that do not have a formal DSMB or DMC 
 
Other Reporting Requirements 
Reporting to the FDA 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 33 of 34 
Serious Adverse Events occurring on studies on which a UW PI is acting as sponsor-investigator must be 
reported to the FDA within the appropriate time frame.  Mandatory and voluntary reporting guidelines 
and instructions are outlined on the FDA website: 
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/MedWatch/HowToReport/default.htm 
 
12. Administrative requirements 
 
12.1. 
Good clinical practice 
The study will be conducted in accordance with FDA and ICH guidelines for Good Clinical Practice.  All 
study staff will be thoroughly familiar with the contents of this protocol and associated trial materials. 
 
12.2. 
Data quality assurance 
The investigator is required to prepare and maintain adequate and accurate case histories designed to 
record all observations and other data pertinent to the study for each study participant. Study data will 
be entered into an electronic case report form (eCRF) by site personnel. Any changes made to study 
data will be made to the CRF.  
 
12.3. 
Study monitoring 
Due to financial and staff limitations there are no formal plans to monitor data for this study; however 
there remains a possibility for this if deemed necessary by the DSMC, HS-IRB, or study team. 
 
12.4. 
Ethical consideration 
The study will be conducted in accordance with ethical principles founded in the Declaration of Helsinki. 
The IRB will review all appropriate study documentation in order to safeguard the rights, safety and 
well-being of the participants. The study will only be conducted at sites where IRB approval has been 
obtained. The protocol, informed consent form, written information given to the patients, safety 
updates, annual progress reports and any revisions to these documents will be provided to the IRB by 
the investigator.  
 
12.5. 
Patient confidentiality 
Information about study participants will be kept confidential and managed according to the 
requirements of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA). Those 
regulations require a signed subject authorization informing the participant of the following: 
• what protected health information (PHI) will be collected from participants in this study 
• who will have access to that information and why 
• who will use or disclose that information 
• the rights of a research participant to revoke their authorization for use of their PHI 
 
All participants will be assigned a study-specific ID number. We will maintain a master list linking each 
participant’s medical record number (MRN) with a study-specific ID number. This list is to be maintained 
in a location separate from any study data. Only study staff listed on the IRB application shall have 
access to the list.  
 
All information obtained and associated data files will be confidential and will be kept in a locked file or 
password protected computer. The risk of breach of confidentiality regarding participation in the study 
outside of the scope of the research will be handled by carefully controlling access to study data only to 
personnel on the research team. 
 

Central Neck Dissection | Protocol (version date: 22-Feb-2018) 
page 34 of 34 
Confidentiality will be protected further by: (1) using a participant log form that contains only the 
minimum necessary protected health information (PHI) concerning participants, and storing this log in a 
locked area when not in use, (2) not sharing PHI with any outside institution, (3) coding data collection 
forms with a consecutive participant number that is not derived from any participant personal 
identifiers, and linking that data collection form to the participant log, and (4) storing the participant log 
and data collection forms separately. 
 
All study data will be kept for 10 years after publication of study findings. All data will be destroyed by 
deletion from computer files and/or shredding. 
 
12.6. 
Investigator compliance 
The investigator will conduct the trial in compliance with the protocol approved by the IRB. Changes to 
the protocol will require written IRB approval prior to implementation, except when the modification is 
needed to eliminate an immediate hazard(s) to participants.  
 
12.7. 
Participant cost and payment 
Cost  
Participants are not expected to incur additional costs from participation as clinical care costs that are 
not considered standard of care will be covered for all participants. 
 
Payment 
Participants will be provided $20 in reimbursement for each completed study visit (participants 
completing the study will have 5 visits). 
 
Clinical care costs that are not considered standard of care will be covered for all participants including 6 
month calcium and PTH testing. For consistency all pre-operative ultrasounds for lymph node staging 
will be performed by a dedicated radiologist at the University of Wisconsin and this expense will be 
covered by the trial.  
 
For our primary recurrence endpoint we would like to have all patients undergo recombinant TSH 
stimulated thyroglobulin testing.  
 
13. Funding sources 
This study is being funded by an R01 Grant. 
 
14. Publication policy 
This study will be registered with ClinicalTrials.gov.