search
Back to results

Comprehensive Aneurysm Management Trial (CAM)

Primary Purpose

Saccular Aneurysm, Intracranial Aneurysm, Unruptured Cerebral Aneurysm

Status
Recruiting
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
microsurgery; endovascular interventions
Sponsored by
Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Saccular Aneurysm focused on measuring Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm, Endovascular treatment, Surgical treatment, Conservative management

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with at least one documented, intracranial subarachnoid aneurysm (cavernous aneurysms are excluded)

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with any intracranial hemorrhage, including SAH, within the previous 30 days
  • Patients with AVM-associated aneurysms
  • Patients unable to give informed consent

Sites / Locations

  • University of Alberta HospitalRecruiting
  • Daniel RoyRecruiting
  • Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de ToursRecruiting
  • ASST Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIIIRecruiting
  • Ospedale Vito FrazziRecruiting
  • Ospedale San Carlo Borromeo di MilanoRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

No Intervention

Arm Label

Interventional Therapy

Conservative Management

Arm Description

Neurosurgery or Endovascular procedure

Monitoring with pharmacological therapy if need arises.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Survival without neurological dependency
Number of patients without neurological dependency. Neurological dependency is defined as an outcome with a modified Rankin Score greater or equal to 3

Secondary Outcome Measures

Sub-arachnoid hemorrhage (SAH)
Number of patients with an incidence of SAH and related morbidity and mortality
morbi/mortality related to interventions
Number of patients with Morbidity or Mortality related to microsurgery of endovascular procedures
Overall mortality
Number of patients dead from any cause
Overall morbidity
Number of patients with a modified Rankin Score greater or equal to 3
Length of hospitalization
Number of days spent in hospital for intervention
Discharge location other than Home
Number of patients discharged to a location other than home after the intervention

Full Information

First Posted
November 5, 2019
Last Updated
June 30, 2023
Sponsor
Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)
Collaborators
University of Alberta
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04155606
Brief Title
Comprehensive Aneurysm Management Trial
Acronym
CAM
Official Title
The Comprehensive Aneurysm Management Trial
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
June 2023
Overall Recruitment Status
Recruiting
Study Start Date
January 15, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
January 2035 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
January 2036 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Centre hospitalier de l'Université de Montréal (CHUM)
Collaborators
University of Alberta

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The uncertainty regarding the management of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms (UIAs) has not progressed in the last 30 years. The fundamental ethical basis for this study is that physicians should only offer a risky preventive treatment when it has been shown to be beneficial. Before that, such treatment should be offered as an RCT. The CAM trial offers a comprehensive framework, so that all patients confronted with the clinical dilemma can be offered participation. The prinicpal questions to be addressed are : do patients with UIAs, considered for curative treatments, have a better long-term clinical outcome with active treatment or conservative management? when patients are considered ineligible for conservative management, and surgical and endovascular management are both judged reasonable, do patients with UIAs have a better long-term clinical outcome with surgical or endovascular management? The primary hypothesis for patients allocated to at least 2 options, one of which is conservative management is: the 10 year combined neurological morbidity and mortality (mRS>2) will be reduced from 24% to 16% (beta 80%; alpha 0.048; sample size 961 patients (836 plus 15% losses to FU and cross-overs) with active treatment. This study is designed as a pragmatic, comprehensive way to address the unruptured aneurysm clinical dilemma, combining large simple RCTs whenever patients are judged eligible for more than one management option, or otherwise a registry of each option. All patients with one or more UIAs will be eligible for participation in either a registry or one of the trials. Patients will be followed for 10 years according to a standard of car follow-up schedule. The primary outcome is survival without neurological dependency (mRS<3) at 10 years. The secondary outcomes are: the incidence of SAH during follow-up and related morbidity and mortality; the morbidity and mortality related to endovascular or surgical treatment of the UIA at one year; overall mortality at 1, 5 and 10 years; overall morbidity (mRS>2) at 1, 5 and 10 years; length of hospitalization; discharge to location other than home
Detailed Description
The best management of patients with unruptured intracranial aneurysms is currently uncertain. The time-honored approach to treating UIAs is with microsurgical clipping, Surgical clipping is widely considered to be a safe, durable means to treat UIAs. In recent years, endovascular treatment (EVT) has increasingly replaced surgical clipping. The efficacy of EVT in the prevention of SAH remains unknown. EVT is reputed to be potentially less effective than surgery because of long term angiographic recurrences. Neither surgery nor EVT have been shown superior to conservative management. Yet, both endovascular and surgical treatment are used every day in a large number of patients, without evidence they are doing more good than harm, and without evidence that one is better than the other. There is currently no scientific evidence to support treatment of UIAs and there are no well-accepted guidelines. The overall annual rupture risk for conservatively managed lesions remains ~1-2% over a follow-up of 6-9 years, likely an underestimate. There is currently no all-inclusive care trial framework for UIA patients. There are also no randomized trials currently comparing active and conservative management for UIAs. The uncertainty regarding the management of UIAs has not progressed in the last 30 years. Avoiding iatrogenia and the consequences of over-diagnosis is an increasingly important public health goal. In the spirit of care trials, this CAM trial offers a comprehensive framework, so that all patients confronted with the clinical dilemma can be offered participation. Main objectives To provide a care research framework to manage all patients with UIAs. For patients for whom conservative management is contemplated, to validate previous observational studies claiming rupture risks are very low. This registry could be used in the future to recruit patients in trials assessing the potential value of imaging follow-up studies or trials assessing pharmacological prevention of ruptures (such as ASA or statins). For each patient for whom curative treatment is contemplated, to provide a 50% chance of being spared a potentially useless or harmful treatment. For each patient for whom surgical clipping is contemplated, to provide a 50% chance of being offered a less invasive alternative. Principal questions to be addressed: Can a care trial context assist clinicians and patients manage the UIA dilemma? When conservative management is contemplated, is the risk of rupture as low as unvalidated observational studies currently suggest? Do patients with UIAs, considered for curative treatments, have a better long-term clinical outcome with active treatment or conservative management? More specifically: 3.1 When active endovascular treatment is contemplated, do patients with UIAs have a better long-term clinical outcome with endovascular or conservative management? 3.2 When active surgical treatment is contemplated, do patients with UIAs have a better long-term clinical outcome with surgical or conservative management? 3.3 When active treatment is contemplated, and surgical and endovascular management are both judged reasonable, do patients with UIAs have a better long-term clinical outcome with (surgical/endovascular) or conservative management? When patients are considered ineligible for conservative management, and surgical and endovascular management are both judged reasonable, do patients with UIAs have a better long-term clinical outcome with surgical or endovascular management? Study design This study is designed as a pragmatic, comprehensive way to address the unruptured aneurysm clinical dilemma, combining large simple clinical care trials whenever patients are judged eligible for more than one management option, or otherwise a registry of each option. All patients with one or more UIAs will be eligible for participation in either a registry or one of the trials. A non-invasive (MRA or CTA) or catheter angiogram and a baseline CT-scan or MRI of the brain are required to enter the study. These studies should demonstrate the unequivocal presence of a saccular aneurysm, not recently ruptured (> 4 weeks since the last SAH). If they accept, all subjects will be registered, and when eligible, included in a specific randomized trial using the algorithm below which includes a combination of clinical judgment and randomized allocation. Conventional randomization will be performed whenever and wherever possible. A double consent pre-randomization design is possible wherever the method is accepted by the local IRB. Planned algorithm for managing patients The algorithmic process combining clinical judgment and randomized allocation will proceed by asking the following questions to the treating physicians. Q1: Is the patient being considered for treatment? Possible answers: YES or NO. If the clinician selects NO, the patient will be included in the observational registry. If YES, the following question will be: Q2: What treatment option is being considered for this patient? Clinicians will use clinical judgment to select one of three options: endovascular, surgical, or they will select that either treatment is reasonable. Then comes the most important question: Q3: Is conservative management a reasonable alternative given the lack of evidence that treatments are beneficial? Potential answers are YES or NO. If NO, they will be included in the CURES trial or in of the 2 treatment registries (surgical or endovascular). If YES, they will be included in the appropriate randomized trial (according to the answer to question 2) that compares endovascular to conservative management (TEAM, or trial on endovascular aneurysm management), surgical to conservative management (TSAM, or Trial on Surgical Aneurysm Management), or they will be included in the TOES arm (Trial on Observational, Endovascular or Surgical management), with potential for a second randomization, comparing surgical to endovascular treatment. Hypotheses: The primary hypothesis for patients allocated to at least 2 options, one of which is conservative management is: The 10 year combined neurological morbidity and mortality (mRS >2) will be reduced from 24% to 16% (beta 80%; alpha 0.048; sample size 961 patients (836 plus 15% losses to FU and cross-overs) with active treatment. Outcomes The primary outcome is survival without neurological dependency (mRS<3) at 10 years. Secondary outcome measures are needed to monitor patient outcomes during the duration of the trial. Secondary outcomes will be: 1/ The incidence of SAH during follow-up and related morbidity and mortality; 2/ The morbidity and mortality related to EVT or surgical treatment of the UIA at one year; 3/ Overall mortality at 1, 5 and 10 years; 4/ Overall morbidity (mRS>2) at 1, 5 and 10 years; 5/ Length of hospitalization; 6/ Discharge to location other than home. This pragmatic care trial has been designed to potentially include all patients with UIAs. Inclusion criteria are as broad as possible and exclusions as few as possible. Frequency and duration of follow-up All the investigations proposed in the UIA care trial constitute part of routine, standard care in the treatment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms. Patients who undergo treatment will be seen in clinic at approximately 6-12 weeks after treatment as part of routine follow-up care. Patients will be followed with another routine clinic visit at one year, and at 5 and 10 years thereafter. All treated patients will have non-invasive imaging (CTA or MRA) at 12 ± 2 months post-treatment to determine the presence of a major, saccular aneurysm recurrence. Number of patients To assess whether the 10 year combined neurological morbidity and mortality (mRS >2) will be reduced from 24% to 16% with active treatment (beta 80%; alpha 0.048) will require at least 961 patients (836 plus 15% losses to FU and cross-overs). Planned Statistical Analyses The 4 stratified trial arms (TSAM, TEAM II, TOES, and CURES) and the registries will be analyzed separately. Combined exploratory analyses will also be performed, looking for differences in group characteristics and in treatment outcomes between RCTs and registries, attempting to better understand the scope and limits of trial results. As with any trials of surgery, early risks may be followed by later benefit. Therefore the hazard ratio will be unfavorable during the recruitment years, while interventions are being performed. Initially, the DSMC will assure that treatment-related complications and hemorrhagic events are within confidence intervals compatible with a safe and meaningful trial. In order to describe how and when hemorrhagic events occur, analyses will include Kaplan-Meyer life-table methods to assess the 1, 5-, and 10-year survival, and survival without hemorrhage, among all those allocated immediate treatment (including the few who did not undergo it) and all those allocated deferral of any intervention (including the few who will eventually be treated). The 'survival' functions will be compared graphically and using a log-rank statistic. The main statistical tests will involve comparisons between the probabilities of mortality and morbidity-mortality 1/ from hemorrhage, excluding peri-operative complications, 2/ from hemorrhage or from complications of treatment, or 3/ comparisons of the 1, 5 and 10-year probabilities of combined disease/treatment-related mortality/morbidity, in the absence of other causes of death or disability. Descriptive statistics will be done on demographic variables and potential risk factors to compare the groups at baseline. Means, standard deviations and range will be presented for quantitative variables such as size of aneurysms and frequency tables for categorical variables (such as number of patients with a previous history of SAH, or multiple aneurysms). Statistics will be broken down by center and by treatment arm. Comparability of the groups will be assessed through independent ANOVAs (quantitative data) or Mantel-Haentzel and X2 tests (categorical data). Assuming comparability of groups across centers, the primary outcome, disease or treatment-related combined morbidity/mortality (for both intent-to-treat and per-protocol populations) will be compared between groups through a Fisher's Exact Test for independent proportions at 1, 5, and 10 years. Similar analyses will be done for disease or treatment-related mortality combined mortality-morbidity. Secondary outcomes and overall morbidity will be compared between groups through independent t-tests (quantitative variables) or X2 statistics (categorical data). The analyses of neurological data at follow-up will control for baseline data using logistic regression, ANOVA or Cox regression multivariate models. All tests will be interpreted with adjustment for multiplicity to have the 0.05 level of confidence at 10 years only. Finally, a logistic regression will be used to find baseline variables capable of predicting hemorrhages or complications in both groups. The method planned is a stepwise forward on a likelihood ratio with a probability of 0.05 to enter a predictor (PIN in) and a probability of 0.10 to exclude a predictor (PIN out). Possible predictors include the size of the aneurysm, location, patient age, status of the aneurysm and previous history of SAH versus unruptured only) as well as other baseline characteristics. All analyses of the primary endpoint will be performed taking into account the multiplicity of tests and any interim analyses. Secondary analyses will be performed using an alpha of 5%.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Saccular Aneurysm, Intracranial Aneurysm, Unruptured Cerebral Aneurysm
Keywords
Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysm, Endovascular treatment, Surgical treatment, Conservative management

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
2000 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Interventional Therapy
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Neurosurgery or Endovascular procedure
Arm Title
Conservative Management
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
Monitoring with pharmacological therapy if need arises.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
microsurgery; endovascular interventions
Intervention Description
microsurgery: surgical resection of the aneurysm endovascular interventions: coiling, stenting or both
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Survival without neurological dependency
Description
Number of patients without neurological dependency. Neurological dependency is defined as an outcome with a modified Rankin Score greater or equal to 3
Time Frame
10 years
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Sub-arachnoid hemorrhage (SAH)
Description
Number of patients with an incidence of SAH and related morbidity and mortality
Time Frame
10 years
Title
morbi/mortality related to interventions
Description
Number of patients with Morbidity or Mortality related to microsurgery of endovascular procedures
Time Frame
1 year
Title
Overall mortality
Description
Number of patients dead from any cause
Time Frame
1, 5 and 10 years
Title
Overall morbidity
Description
Number of patients with a modified Rankin Score greater or equal to 3
Time Frame
1, 5 and 10 years
Title
Length of hospitalization
Description
Number of days spent in hospital for intervention
Time Frame
10 years
Title
Discharge location other than Home
Description
Number of patients discharged to a location other than home after the intervention
Time Frame
10 years

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with at least one documented, intracranial subarachnoid aneurysm (cavernous aneurysms are excluded) Exclusion Criteria: Patients with any intracranial hemorrhage, including SAH, within the previous 30 days Patients with AVM-associated aneurysms Patients unable to give informed consent
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Tim Darsaut, MD, MSc
Phone
780-407-1440
Email
tdarsaut@ualberta.ca
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Jean Raymond, MD
Phone
514-890-8000
Ext
27235
Email
jean.raymond@umontreal.ca
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Tim Darsaut, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Neurosurgeon University of Alberta Health
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
University of Alberta Hospital
City
Edmonton
State/Province
Alberta
ZIP/Postal Code
T6G 2R3
Country
Canada
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Tim Darsaut, MD, MSc
Phone
780-407-1440
Email
tdarsaut@ualberta.ca
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Tim Darsaut, MD, MSc
Facility Name
Daniel Roy
City
Montreal
State/Province
Quebec
ZIP/Postal Code
H2X 3E4
Country
Canada
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Daniel Roy, MD
Phone
514-890-8000
Ext
27235
Email
daniel.roy.chum@ssss.gouv.qc.ca
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Guylaine Gevry, BSc
Phone
514-890-8000
Ext
27235
Email
guylaine.gevry.chum@ssss.gouv.qc.ca
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Daniel Roy, MD
Facility Name
Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire de Tours
City
Tours
Country
France
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Grégoire Boulouis, MD
Email
G.BOULOUIS@chu-tours.fr
Facility Name
ASST Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII
City
Bergamo
Country
Italy
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Luca Quilici
Email
lquilici@asst-pg23.it
Facility Name
Ospedale Vito Frazzi
City
Lecce
ZIP/Postal Code
73100
Country
Italy
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Emilio Lozupone, MD
Facility Name
Ospedale San Carlo Borromeo di Milano
City
Milan
Country
Italy
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Luca Valvassori, MD
Email
luca.valvassori@asst-santipaolocarlo.it

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No

Learn more about this trial

Comprehensive Aneurysm Management Trial

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs