Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-26 @ 1:17 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2025-12-31 @ 9:45 PM
Study NCT ID:
NCT02729506
Status:
UNKNOWN
Last Update Posted:
2016-04-06
First Post:
2016-02-04
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Sponsor:
King Faisal Specialist Hospital & Research Center
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Transarterial Radioembolization Versus Chemoembolization for the Treatment of Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Status:
UNKNOWN
Status Verified Date:
2016-03
Last Known Status:
RECRUITING
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Hepatocellular Carcinoma (HCC) is a primary liver cancer. It is the 6th most common malignancy and the 3rd killers of all tumors worldwide with an incidence of 626,000 new patients a year. The intermediate stage of HCC is controlled by radiological interventions such as Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) or Radioembolization. Although 90Y radioembolization is increasingly being used in clinical practice, there is no high quality clinical evidence to justify this. To date, no prospective studies have been performed comparing both treatment modalities (TACE vs 90Y) in a randomized setting. This randomized controlled trial is designed to prospectively compare TACE and 90Y for treatment of patients with unresectable (BCLC intermediate stage) HCC. This will be done by recruiting 75 patients in each arm from. Investigators will compare between the two groups the time to progression (TTP) as the primary outcome and also examine time to local progression (TLP) as well as other factors like overall survival, response to therapy, toxicities and adverse events, quality of life and treatment-related costs.
Detailed Description:
Study Rationale:
Although 90Y increasingly used in clinical practice, there is no high quality clinical evidence to justify this. Most of the comparison studies are retrospective. Three studies compared TACE with 90Y retrospectively. The first was by Kooby et al in which patients treated with TACE were retrospectively compared to those treated with 90Y suggested that both treatment modalities have similar effectiveness and safety profiles in patients with unresectable HCC. Earlier Carr et al carried out a similar retrospective analysis and concluded that Chemoembolization or Radioembolization appeared to be equivalent regional therapies for patients with unresectable, non-metastatic HCC. More recently Salem et al retrospectively compared 122 HCC patients who received chemo-embolization with 123 patients who received Radioembolization and concluded both patient groups had similar survival times. Radioembolization resulted in longer time-to-progression and less toxicity than chemo-embolization.
A study on down-staging of HCC beyond Milan criteria compare 90Y with TACE of and concluded that 90Y outperforms TACE for down-staging HCC to within transplant criteria.
TACE-DEB is the standardized form TACE with better efficacy and safety profile and will be ideal to use to define the position of 90Y in the of locoregional treatment of HCC.
To date, no prospective studies have been performed comparing both treatment modalities in a randomized setting. This randomized controlled trial is designed to prospectively compare TACE and 90Y for treatment of patients with unresectable (BCLC intermediate stage) HCC.
Known Potential Benefits:
Chemo-embolization is the standard treatment for intermediate HCC with known efficacy and predicted toxicity. The arrival of TAC-DEBs made TACE more efficient, less toxic and more standardized. Y90 Radioembolization is of known efficacy and minimal toxicity base on cohort studies. Head to head comparison has never been conducted.
Although 90Y increasingly used in clinical practice, there is no high quality clinical evidence to justify this. Most of the comparison studies are retrospective. Three studies compared TACE with 90Y retrospectively. The first was by Kooby et al in which patients treated with TACE were retrospectively compared to those treated with 90Y suggested that both treatment modalities have similar effectiveness and safety profiles in patients with unresectable HCC. Earlier Carr et al carried out a similar retrospective analysis and concluded that Chemoembolization or Radioembolization appeared to be equivalent regional therapies for patients with unresectable, non-metastatic HCC. More recently Salem et al retrospectively compared 122 HCC patients who received chemo-embolization with 123 patients who received Radioembolization and concluded both patient groups had similar survival times. Radioembolization resulted in longer time-to-progression and less toxicity than chemo-embolization.
A study on down-staging of HCC beyond Milan criteria compare 90Y with TACE of and concluded that 90Y outperforms TACE for down-staging HCC to within transplant criteria.
TACE-DEB is the standardized form TACE with better efficacy and safety profile and will be ideal to use to define the position of 90Y in the of locoregional treatment of HCC.
To date, no prospective studies have been performed comparing both treatment modalities in a randomized setting. This randomized controlled trial is designed to prospectively compare TACE and 90Y for treatment of patients with unresectable (BCLC intermediate stage) HCC.
Known Potential Benefits:
Chemo-embolization is the standard treatment for intermediate HCC with known efficacy and predicted toxicity. The arrival of TAC-DEBs made TACE more efficient, less toxic and more standardized. Y90 Radioembolization is of known efficacy and minimal toxicity base on cohort studies. Head to head comparison has never been conducted.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
True
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: