EDIT Management Feasibility Trial (Pre-EDIT)
|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: NCT03319186|
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified October 2017 by NHS Greater Glasgow and Clyde.
Recruitment status was: Recruiting
First Posted : October 24, 2017
Last Update Posted : October 24, 2017
Malignant Pleural Effusion (MPE) is a collection of fluid inside the chest caused by cancer. It is a common medical problem and often causes severe breathlessness. Patients with this condition generally have a very poor survival and so it is extremely important that they are given effective treatment as soon as possible to minimise the amount of time they have to spend in hospital.
Standard treatment for MPE involves an admission to hospital to drain the fluid and then attempt to prevent the fluid from returning by sticking the lung to the inside of the rib cage with medical talc powder which acts like glue. This is called talc pleurodesis (TP) but unfortunately it fails in about 30% of patients. This is usually because the lung has not fully re-expanded and has not made contact with the inside of the ribs. When this happens, the fluid can be effectively treated with a different type of drainage tube called an indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) which tunnels under the skin and is drained at home by the district nurses.
It is thought that pressure measurements taken from the fluid as it is drained may be able to show doctors whether or not the lung will re-expand before patients are committed to either TP or an IPC. In this research we wish to test if these measurements can be used to choose which is the best first treatment option (TP or IPC) for patients with MPE. We have called this 'EDIT management'. Since it is uncertain whether this new approach will work, patients will be randomised to have either standard treatment or EDIT management. We will compare the two groups to assess whether the patients who had EDIT management had to have fewer repeat procedures over the following 3 months.
|Condition or disease||Intervention/treatment||Phase|
|Pleural Effusion, Malignant||Procedure: EDIT Management Procedure: Chest drain and talc pleurodesis||Not Applicable|
|Study Type :||Interventional (Clinical Trial)|
|Estimated Enrollment :||30 participants|
|Intervention Model:||Parallel Assignment|
|Masking:||None (Open Label)|
|Official Title:||Pre-EDIT: A Randomised, Feasibility Trial of Elastance-Directed Intra-pleural Catheter or Talc Pleurodesis (EDIT) in the Management of Symptomatic Malignant Pleural Effusion Without Obvious Non-expansile Lung|
|Actual Study Start Date :||August 28, 2017|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||August 2018|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||November 2018|
|Experimental: EDIT Management||
Procedure: EDIT Management
|Active Comparator: Standard Care||
Procedure: Chest drain and talc pleurodesis
Intercostal chest drain insertion and talc slurry instillation according to British Thoracic Society guidelines
- Feasibility of recruiting 30 patients within 12 months and randomising them to either EDIT Management or Standard Care [ Time Frame: 12 months ]The number of patients recruited and randomised within 12 months
- Failure rate of the manometry procedure [ Time Frame: 12 months ]Defined as the proportion of patients in whom PEL cannot be computed
- Incidence of adverse events associated with the manometry procedure [ Time Frame: 12 months ]Number of participants with Adverse Events (AEs) and Serious AEs (SAEs), defined by United Kingdom Good Clinical Practice in Research, associated with use of the digital pleural manometer
- Aspiration threshold to detect abnormal pleural elastance [ Time Frame: 12 months ]The pleural fluid aspiration volume at which the rolling average pleural elastance over the preceding 250ml (PEL250) first exceeds the upper limit of normal (14.5cm H2O/L).
- Proportion of patients requiring pneumothorax induction following manometry [ Time Frame: 12 months ]The proportion of patients in which pneumothorax induction is required to facilitate safe intercostal chest drain/IPC insertion in the EDIT arm (Group A)
- Assess accuracy of pleural cavity volume change assumptions [ Time Frame: 12 months ]
To test the assumption that pleural cavity volume change is equivalent to the volume of pleural fluid removed during aspiration by measuring:
- Pleural fluid aspiration volume
- Pleural cavity volume change, as measured directly using volumetric Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI), calculated as pre- minus post-aspiration pleural cavity volume
- Assess accuracy of ultrasound effusion volume estimate [ Time Frame: 12 months ]
To test the accuracy of a predictive model of pleural effusion volume based on thoracic ultrasound measurements by measuring:
- Thoracic ultrasound estimated total pleural effusion volume
- Pre-pleural fluid aspiration pleural cavity volume measured by volumetric MRI
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): NCT03319186
|Contact: Joanne McGarry||+ 44 141 232 email@example.com|
|Queen Elizabeth University Hospital||Recruiting|
|Glasgow, United Kingdom|
|Contact: Kevin Blyth, MD firstname.lastname@example.org|