Cryoablation or External-Beam Radiation Therapy in Treating Patients With Painful Bone Metastases
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00540969|
Recruitment Status : Terminated (Low accrual)
First Posted : October 8, 2007
Results First Posted : February 1, 2017
Last Update Posted : November 21, 2018
RATIONALE: Cryoablation kills cancer cells by freezing them. Radiation therapy uses high-energy x-rays and other types of radiation to kill tumor cells. It is not yet known whether cryoablation is more effective than external-beam radiation therapy in treating painful bone metastases.
PURPOSE: This randomized phase III clinical trial is studying cryoablation to see how well it works compared with external-beam radiation therapy in treating patients with painful bone metastases.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Kidney Cancer Melanoma (Skin) Metastatic Cancer Pain Unspecified Adult Solid Tumor, Protocol Specific||Procedure: cryosurgery Radiation: radiation therapy||Phase 3|
- To determine pain relief in cancer patients with painful metastatic disease involving bone following treatment with cryoablation as compared to radiotherapy (RT).
- To compare the impact on quality-of-life following cryoablation or RT in patients with painful metastatic disease as measured using the validated Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and Short Form (SF)-8.
- To determine change in analgesic use following therapy.
- To determine the frequency and severity of complications following treatment of painful metastases involving bone with either cryoablation or RT.
OUTLINE: This is a multicenter study. Patients are stratified according to size of the indexing lesion (≤ 5 cm vs > 5 cm), location of the target lesion (pelvis vs extremity vs vertebral body vs other), primary cancer type (melanoma or renal cell carcinoma vs other), and severity of pain (i.e., worst pain score in the last 24-hour period) (4-6 vs 7-10). Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 treatment arms.
- Arm I (percutaneous cryoablation): Cryoprobes are inserted percutaneously under CT scan or ultrasound guidance, to the malignant soft tissue-bone interface. Patients undergo ablations using a freeze-thaw-freeze cycle lasting approximately 10-5-10 minutes, respectively.
- Arm II (external-beam radiotherapy): Patients undergo external-beam radiotherapy comprising either a single 8 Gy dose or 20 Gy/5 fractions administered over 1 week.
Patients are contacted via phone on days 1 and 4 post treatment, weekly in weeks 1-4, every 2 weeks in weeks 6-24, and then every four weeks in weeks 28-36. Patients undergo pain and pain interference with daily life assessment at baseline and at these time points. Patients who elect to have repeated treatment (either radiotherapy or cryoablation) within the first 6 weeks after the initial treatment are removed from the study. Patients who fail to achieve a 2-point reduction in worst or average pain (in a 24-hour period) during weeks 6-20 after initial treatment and patients who report a return of pain (i.e., pain ≥ the worst pain in a 24-hour period reported at baseline) for 2 consecutive time points are offered the alternative treatment (radiotherapy or cryoablation, whichever the patient was not randomized to receive at initial treatment)*.
NOTE: *Patients who refuse to receive the alternative treatment are taken off study.
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Actual Enrollment :||3 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||A Phase III Randomized Trial of Cryoablation vs. Radiation for the Palliation of Painful Bone Metastases|
|Actual Study Start Date :||February 2008|
|Actual Primary Completion Date :||January 2010|
|Actual Study Completion Date :||January 2010|
Experimental: Arm I (percutaneous cryoablation)
Cryoprobes are inserted percutaneously under CT scan or ultrasound guidance, to the malignant soft tissue-bone interface. Patients undergo ablations using a freeze-thaw-freeze cycle lasting approximately 10-5-10 minutes, respectively.
Patients undergo cryosurgery using guidance from CT scan or ultrasound
Active Comparator: Arm II (external-beam radiotherapy)
Patients undergo external-beam radiotherapy comprising either a single 8 Gy dose or 20 Gy/5 fractions administered over 1 week.
Radiation: radiation therapy
Patients undergo radiotherapy for 1 week
- Comparison of Pre- and Post-treatment Worst Pain in 24 Hours at Week 6 as Measured on the Numeric 0 to 10 Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) Scale [ Time Frame: at week 6 ]
- Average Difference in Pre- and Post-treatment Average Pain, Pain Relief, and Pain Interference Scores at Week 6 as Measured With the BPI [ Time Frame: at week 6 ]
- Average Difference in Pre- and Post-treatment Physical (PCS-8) and Mental (MCS-8) Quality of Life at Week 6 as Measured by the 2 Subscales of the Short Form (SF)-8 [ Time Frame: at week 6 ]
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT00540969
|United States, Alabama|
|UAB Comprehensive Cancer Center|
|Birmingham, Alabama, United States, 35294|
|United States, Arizona|
|Mayo Clinic Scottsdale|
|Scottsdale, Arizona, United States, 85259-5499|
|United States, Florida|
|Mayo Clinic - Jacksonville|
|Jacksonville, Florida, United States, 32224|
|United States, Michigan|
|Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute|
|Detroit, Michigan, United States, 48201-1379|
|United States, Minnesota|
|Mayo Clinic Cancer Center|
|Rochester, Minnesota, United States, 55905|
|United States, Wisconsin|
|Vince Lombardi Cancer Clinic at Aurora St. Luke's Medical Center|
|Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States, 53215|
|Medical College of Wisconsin Cancer Center|
|Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States, 53226|
|Study Chair:||Matthew R. Callstrom, MD, PhD||Mayo Clinic|