Working…
COVID-19 is an emerging, rapidly evolving situation.
Get the latest public health information from CDC: https://www.coronavirus.gov.

Get the latest research information from NIH: https://www.nih.gov/coronavirus.
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Hepatic Resection for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinomas Smaller Than 2 cm

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: NCT01351194
Recruitment Status : Unknown
Verified March 2010 by Sun Yat-sen University.
Recruitment status was:  Recruiting
First Posted : May 10, 2011
Last Update Posted : May 26, 2011
Sponsor:
Information provided by:
Sun Yat-sen University

Tracking Information
First Submitted Date  ICMJE May 6, 2011
First Posted Date  ICMJE May 10, 2011
Last Update Posted Date May 26, 2011
Study Start Date  ICMJE March 2010
Estimated Primary Completion Date May 2012   (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Current Primary Outcome Measures  ICMJE
 (submitted: May 9, 2011)
overall survival [ Time Frame: 3 year ]
Original Primary Outcome Measures  ICMJE Same as current
Change History
Current Secondary Outcome Measures  ICMJE
 (submitted: May 24, 2011)
disease-free survival [ Time Frame: 3 year ]
Original Secondary Outcome Measures  ICMJE
 (submitted: May 9, 2011)
desease-free survival [ Time Frame: 3 year ]
Current Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures Not Provided
Original Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures Not Provided
 
Descriptive Information
Brief Title  ICMJE Radiofrequency Ablation Versus Hepatic Resection for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinomas Smaller Than 2 cm
Official Title  ICMJE Radiofrequency Ablation vs. Hepatic Resection for the Treatment of Hepatocellular Carcinomas Smaller Than 2 cm.A Prospective and Randomized Clinical Trial
Brief Summary Recently, a clinical trial has shown that PRFA is as effective as HR for small HCC in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival. This has prompted some authors to suggest that PRFA could be more suitable than HR for early stage HCC. Some authors also have suggested that PRFA can be considered the treatment of choice for patients with single HCC ≤ 2.0 cm, even when HR is possible. On the other hand, some tumors (subcapsular location, adjacent to intestinal loops or main bile ducts) may be unsuitable for PRFA because of the risk of bleeding, tumor seeding, bile leakage, perforation, and so on. Furthermore, in our previous experience, some tumors (with deep locations, which were included as "central HCC") may be also unsuitable for HR because of risks of more injury of normal liver tissue, blood loss after resection, and so on. Therefore, the appropriate therapeutic option for these HCC tumors ≤ 2 cm, especially for central HCC, is still under debate. To clarify this issue, the investigators conducted a study that included a consecutive series of patients with single resectable HCC < 2.0 cm in diameter, who underwent PRFA or HR.
Detailed Description

With the development of medical science, more and more patients are being diagnosed with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) at an early stage (single ≤ 5 cm in diameter or ≤ 3 nodules, ≤ 3 cm in diameter) allowing for radical treatment by hepatic resection (HR), liver transplantation, or percutaneous ablation . Liver transplantation can eliminate the tumor and cirrhosis at the same time, and is considered to be the most appropriate treatment for these patients. However, the lack of liver donors is a major limitation. Until now, HR has still been considered as the first-choice treatment for these patients, which may offer a 5-year survival rate above 50%. Percutaneous ablation, including percutaneous ethanol injection (PEI) and percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA), is usually considered to be a second-choice treatment for small HCC which is unresectable due to impaired liver function, and liver transplantation is not indicated.

Recently, a clinical trial has shown that PRFA is as effective as HR for small HCC in terms of overall survival and disease-free survival. This has prompted some authors to suggest that PRFA could be more suitable than HR for early stage HCC. Some authors also have suggested that PRFA can be considered the treatment of choice for patients with single HCC ≤ 2.0 cm, even when HR is possible. On the other hand, some tumors (subcapsular location, adjacent to intestinal loops or main bile ducts) may be unsuitable for PRFA because of the risk of bleeding, tumor seeding, bile leakage, perforation, and so on. Furthermore, in our previous experience, some tumors (with deep locations, which were included as "central HCC") may be also unsuitable for HR because of risks of more injury of normal liver tissue, blood loss after resection, and so on. Therefore, the appropriate therapeutic option for these HCC tumors ≤ 2 cm, especially for central HCC, is still under debate. To clarify this issue, the investigators conducted a study that included a consecutive series of patients with single resectable HCC < 2.0 cm in diameter, who underwent PRFA or HR.

Study Type  ICMJE Interventional
Study Phase  ICMJE Phase 4
Study Design  ICMJE Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Factorial Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)
Primary Purpose: Treatment
Condition  ICMJE Hepatocellular Carcinoma
Intervention  ICMJE
  • Procedure: RFA
    For PRFA, we used a commercially available system with a 375-KHz computer-assisted radiofrequency generator (Elektrotom HiTT 106, Berchtold, Medizinelektronik, Germany) and an open-perfused electrode (Berchtold, Tuttlingen, Germany) of 15 cm (or 20 cm), 14 Ga, and a 15 mm (or 20 mm) active electrode tip with microbores. The 14 Ga needle was introduced into the center of the tumor; then, 60 W of the radiofrequency energy was delivered by the generator with an 8-minute duration for every single energy application.
  • Procedure: hepatic resection
    SR was carried out under general anesthesia using a right subcostal incision with a midline extension.Intra-operative ultrasonography was performed routinely to evaluate the tumor burden, liver remnant, and the possibility of a negative resection margin. Anatomic resection, in the form of segmentectomy and/or subsegmentectomy as described by Makuuchi et al. (16) was the preferred surgical method of liver resection. Pringle's maneuver was routinely used with a clamp and unclamp time of 10 min and 5 min, respectively; this technique was used repeatedly throughout the entire procedure. Hemostasis of the raw liver surface was done with suturing and application of fibrin glue.
Study Arms  ICMJE
  • Experimental: RFA group
    For PRFA, we used a commercially available system with a 375-KHz computer-assisted radiofrequency generator (Elektrotom HiTT 106, Berchtold, Medizinelektronik, Germany) and an open-perfused electrode (Berchtold, Tuttlingen, Germany) of 15 cm (or 20 cm), 14 Ga, and a 15 mm (or 20 mm) active electrode tip with microbores.
    Intervention: Procedure: RFA
  • Experimental: HR group
    SR was carried out under general anesthesia using a right subcostal incision with a midline extension. Intra-operative ultrasonography was performed routinely to evaluate the tumor burden, liver remnant, and the possibility of a negative resection margin. Anatomic resection, in the form of segmentectomy and/or subsegmentectomy as described by Makuuchi et al. (16) was the preferred surgical method of liver resection. Pringle's maneuver was routinely used with a clamp and unclamp time of 10 min and 5 min, respectively; this technique was used repeatedly throughout the entire procedure.
    Intervention: Procedure: hepatic resection
Publications * Chen MS, Li JQ, Zheng Y, Guo RP, Liang HH, Zhang YQ, Lin XJ, Lau WY. A prospective randomized trial comparing percutaneous local ablative therapy and partial hepatectomy for small hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Surg. 2006 Mar;243(3):321-8.

*   Includes publications given by the data provider as well as publications identified by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number) in Medline.
 
Recruitment Information
Recruitment Status  ICMJE Unknown status
Estimated Enrollment  ICMJE
 (submitted: May 9, 2011)
180
Original Estimated Enrollment  ICMJE Same as current
Estimated Study Completion Date  ICMJE May 2013
Estimated Primary Completion Date May 2012   (Final data collection date for primary outcome measure)
Eligibility Criteria  ICMJE

Inclusion Criteria:

  1. age 18 - 75 years, who refused liver transplantation;
  2. presence of solitary HCC measuring ≤ 2.0 cm in diameter;
  3. resectable disease, which is defined as the possibility of completely removing all tumors and retaining a sufficient liver remnant to maintain liver function, as assessed by our surgery team;
  4. Eastern Co-operative Oncology Group performance (ECOG) status 0 (15);

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. severe coagulation disorders (prothrombin activity < 40% or a platelet count of < 40,000 / mm3;
  2. the presence of vascular invasion or extrahepatic spread on imaging;
  3. Child-Pugh class C liver cirrhosis or evidence of hepatic decompensation including ascites, esophageal or gastric variceal bleeding, or hepatic encephalopathy;
  4. previous treatment.
Sex/Gender  ICMJE
Sexes Eligible for Study: All
Ages  ICMJE 18 Years to 75 Years   (Adult, Older Adult)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers  ICMJE No
Contacts  ICMJE Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
Listed Location Countries  ICMJE China
Removed Location Countries  
 
Administrative Information
NCT Number  ICMJE NCT01351194
Other Study ID Numbers  ICMJE HCC0012
Has Data Monitoring Committee Yes
U.S. FDA-regulated Product Not Provided
IPD Sharing Statement  ICMJE Not Provided
Responsible Party Cancer Center, Sun Yat-sen University
Study Sponsor  ICMJE Sun Yat-sen University
Collaborators  ICMJE Not Provided
Investigators  ICMJE
Principal Investigator: min-shan chen, Ph.D.,M.D. Cancer Center, Sun Yat-set University
PRS Account Sun Yat-sen University
Verification Date March 2010

ICMJE     Data element required by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors and the World Health Organization ICTRP