search
Back to results

Adjuvant PIPAC in Gastric Cancer Patients (PIPAC-OPC4)

Primary Purpose

Gastric Adenocarcinoma, Gastric Cancer

Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 1
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Doxorubicin
Cisplatin
Sponsored by
Michael Bau Mortensen
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional other trial for Gastric Adenocarcinoma focused on measuring Gastric adenocarcinoma, Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, Laparoscopic gastrectomy, Gastric cancer, Surgery

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with high-risk GAC defined as: Diffuse cancer (signet ring cells predominant) or clinical stage: cTany + cN2-3 or cT3-T4 + cNany or GAC patients with preoperative positive peritoneal cytology submitted to laparoscopic gastrectomy (+/- neoadjuvant treatment).
  • Age 18 or above
  • Written informed consent
  • Women must be postmenopausal or use adequate contraception with a negative pregnancy test at inclusion.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Previous allergic reaction to cisplatin, doxorubicin or other platinum containing compounds.
  • Renal impairment, defined as GFR < 40 ml/min (Cockcroft-Gault Equation).
  • Myocardial insufficiency, defined as NYHA class 3-4.
  • Impaired liver function defined as bilirubin ≥ 1.5 x UNL (upper normal limit).
  • Inadequate haematological function defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≤ 1.5 x 10^9/l and platelets ≤ 100 x 10^9/l.
  • Any other condition or therapy, which in the investigator's opinion may pose a risk to the patient or interfere with the study objectives.

Sites / Locations

  • Odense PIPAC Center, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital
  • Karolinska University Hospital

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm Type

Experimental

Arm Label

High-risk gastric cancer patients

Arm Description

The study population of high-risk gastric cancer patients will be offered one session of PIPAC immediately after laparoscopic removal of the stomach.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Medical adverse events
According to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.
Surgical complications
According to the Dindo-Clavien classification

Secondary Outcome Measures

Length of stay
The amount of time the patient is hospitalized
Positive peritoneal lavage
The rate of positive peritoneal lavage before and after surgery
Adjuvant chemotherapy
The number of patients that receive adjuvant systemic chemotherapy

Full Information

First Posted
August 2, 2019
Last Updated
October 5, 2022
Sponsor
Michael Bau Mortensen
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04047004
Brief Title
Adjuvant PIPAC in Gastric Cancer Patients
Acronym
PIPAC-OPC4
Official Title
Adjuvant Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) During Laparoscopic Resection in High-risk Gastric Cancer Patients: A Multicentre Phase-I Study (the PIPAC-OPC4 Study)
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
October 2022
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
March 11, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
June 30, 2022 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
October 1, 2022 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor-Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Michael Bau Mortensen

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
In this study patients will be offered intraperitoneal atomized chemotherapy as a supplement to the standard treatment of high-risk gastric cancer (laparoscopic removal of the stomach). Two commercially available oncologic drugs will be used (doxorubicin and cisplatin).
Detailed Description
Gastric adenocarcinoma (GAC) is considered the fifth most common cancer in the word and the third leading cause of cancer death globally. The majority of GAC patients presents with advanced stages of disease leading to a dismal prognosis even after treatments with curative intent. Irrespective of these tumors' origin, the peritoneum is one of the most frequent sites of metastases and recurrences that generally determines the subsequent prognosis. Additionally, it is observed that none of the currently available perioperative chemotherapy regimens have been able to reduce the risk for peritoneal deposits. Peritoneal metastases (PMs) are formed during processes that entraps the malignant cells and this restrictive milieu is thought to hinder the penetrance of drugs delivered systemically and provides grounds for the early administration of intraperitoneal treatments. The presence of malignant intraperitoneal cells that is not cleared by chemotherapy before surgery, and/or seeding of malignant cells during surgery, are probably the major reasons for the development of PM and thus the poor prognosis after seemingly micro-radical surgery. Since only a fraction of the systemically administered chemotherapy reaches the peritoneum, the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy has been eagerly studied. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis identified three trials evaluating the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy and/or extensive peritoneal lavage in gastric cancer patients who underwent subsequent surgery. Two and five-year overall survival increased significantly in patients who had intraperitoneal chemotherapy (RR=1.62 and 3.10) and survival further increased by the addition of extensive lavage (RR= 2.33 and 6.19). The intraperitoneal delivery and subsequent uptake of chemotherapy is improved by a new aerosol technique. Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) has shown promising results in patients with PM from colorectal, ovarian and gastric cancer (see below), and PIPAC is feasible, safe and well tolerated by the majority of patients. Our own database assessed the outcome of PIPAC, with low-dose cisplatin and doxorubicin, in GAC patients with chemotherapy-resistant PM. Objective tumor response was documented in 40% of the patients after PIPAC, including complete histological regression in some, whereas an additional 20% had no further tumor progression (manuscript in preparation). These observations in GAC patients deliver further evidence suggesting that PIPAC can induce regression of resistant PMs in several cancer types and might meet the clinical need for new and better therapies for fatal cancer disease states. Our results also provide evidence that low-dose PIPAC therapy might be effective in treating patients with recurrent, chemo-resistant gastric PMs, including the aggressive signet-ring histology. The imminent question is whether PIPAC delivered immediately after a laparoscopic gastrectomy for GAC, in patients being exposed to a significant risk of early recurrent disease, can be safely carried out? If so, for the first time, a corresponding therapeutic concept can be offered to similar GAC patients in addition to surgery with curative intent. This could potentially increase progression free and eventually overall survival. Twenty patients will be enrolled from two Danish and Swedish hospitals according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria and included in the data analysis if laparoscopic removal of the stomach and subsequent immediate PIPAC has been performed.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Gastric Adenocarcinoma, Gastric Cancer
Keywords
Gastric adenocarcinoma, Intraperitoneal chemotherapy, Laparoscopic gastrectomy, Gastric cancer, Surgery

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Other
Study Phase
Phase 1
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Model Description
Prospective, multicenter, non-randomized, non-blinded, open-label
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
N/A
Enrollment
20 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
High-risk gastric cancer patients
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The study population of high-risk gastric cancer patients will be offered one session of PIPAC immediately after laparoscopic removal of the stomach.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Doxorubicin
Intervention Description
Conventional PIPAC with doxorubicin (2.1 mg/m2 body surface in 50ml saline) is performed through the CE-certified nebulizer by certified PIPAC surgeons directly after the completion of the laparoscopic gastric resection and reconstruction using the remaining relevant ports. Chemotherapy is installed at a rate of 0.5-0.8 ml/s with a maximum pressure of 300 pressure per square inch and 30 minutes of simple diffusion.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Cisplatin
Intervention Description
Conventional PIPAC with cisplatin (10.5 mg/m2 body surface in 150ml saline) is performed through the CE-certified nebulizer by certified PIPAC surgeons directly after the completion of the laparoscopic gastric resection and reconstruction using the remaining relevant ports. Chemotherapy is installed at a rate of 0.5-0.8 ml/s with a maximum pressure of 300 pressure per square inch and 30 minutes of simple diffusion.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Medical adverse events
Description
According to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 5.
Time Frame
30 days
Title
Surgical complications
Description
According to the Dindo-Clavien classification
Time Frame
30 days
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Length of stay
Description
The amount of time the patient is hospitalized
Time Frame
30 days
Title
Positive peritoneal lavage
Description
The rate of positive peritoneal lavage before and after surgery
Time Frame
30 days
Title
Adjuvant chemotherapy
Description
The number of patients that receive adjuvant systemic chemotherapy
Time Frame
30 days

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with high-risk GAC defined as: Diffuse cancer (signet ring cells predominant) or clinical stage: cTany + cN2-3 or cT3-T4 + cNany or GAC patients with preoperative positive peritoneal cytology submitted to laparoscopic gastrectomy (+/- neoadjuvant treatment). Age 18 or above Written informed consent Women must be postmenopausal or use adequate contraception with a negative pregnancy test at inclusion. Exclusion Criteria: Previous allergic reaction to cisplatin, doxorubicin or other platinum containing compounds. Renal impairment, defined as GFR < 40 ml/min (Cockcroft-Gault Equation). Myocardial insufficiency, defined as NYHA class 3-4. Impaired liver function defined as bilirubin ≥ 1.5 x UNL (upper normal limit). Inadequate haematological function defined as absolute neutrophil count (ANC) ≤ 1.5 x 10^9/l and platelets ≤ 100 x 10^9/l. Any other condition or therapy, which in the investigator's opinion may pose a risk to the patient or interfere with the study objectives.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Signe Bremholm Ellebæk, MD, PhD
Organizational Affiliation
Odense University Hospital
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Odense PIPAC Center, Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital
City
Odense
ZIP/Postal Code
5000
Country
Denmark
Facility Name
Karolinska University Hospital
City
Stockholm
Country
Sweden

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
22811834
Citation
Yang D, Hendifar A, Lenz C, Togawa K, Lenz F, Lurje G, Pohl A, Winder T, Ning Y, Groshen S, Lenz HJ. Survival of metastatic gastric cancer: Significance of age, sex and race/ethnicity. J Gastrointest Oncol. 2011 Jun;2(2):77-84. doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2078-6891.2010.025.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28850174
Citation
Wagner AD, Syn NL, Moehler M, Grothe W, Yong WP, Tai BC, Ho J, Unverzagt S. Chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Aug 29;8(8):CD004064. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004064.pub4.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28448662
Citation
Al-Batran SE, Homann N, Pauligk C, Illerhaus G, Martens UM, Stoehlmacher J, Schmalenberg H, Luley KB, Prasnikar N, Egger M, Probst S, Messmann H, Moehler M, Fischbach W, Hartmann JT, Mayer F, Hoffkes HG, Koenigsmann M, Arnold D, Kraus TW, Grimm K, Berkhoff S, Post S, Jager E, Bechstein W, Ronellenfitsch U, Monig S, Hofheinz RD. Effect of Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Surgical Resection on Survival in Patients With Limited Metastatic Gastric or Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: The AIO-FLOT3 Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2017 Sep 1;3(9):1237-1244. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0515.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27776843
Citation
Al-Batran SE, Hofheinz RD, Pauligk C, Kopp HG, Haag GM, Luley KB, Meiler J, Homann N, Lorenzen S, Schmalenberg H, Probst S, Koenigsmann M, Egger M, Prasnikar N, Caca K, Trojan J, Martens UM, Block A, Fischbach W, Mahlberg R, Clemens M, Illerhaus G, Zirlik K, Behringer DM, Schmiegel W, Pohl M, Heike M, Ronellenfitsch U, Schuler M, Bechstein WO, Konigsrainer A, Gaiser T, Schirmacher P, Hozaeel W, Reichart A, Goetze TO, Sievert M, Jager E, Monig S, Tannapfel A. Histopathological regression after neoadjuvant docetaxel, oxaliplatin, fluorouracil, and leucovorin versus epirubicin, cisplatin, and fluorouracil or capecitabine in patients with resectable gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma (FLOT4-AIO): results from the phase 2 part of a multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 2/3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016 Dec;17(12):1697-1708. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(16)30531-9. Epub 2016 Oct 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16822992
Citation
Cunningham D, Allum WH, Stenning SP, Thompson JN, Van de Velde CJ, Nicolson M, Scarffe JH, Lofts FJ, Falk SJ, Iveson TJ, Smith DB, Langley RE, Verma M, Weeden S, Chua YJ, MAGIC Trial Participants. Perioperative chemotherapy versus surgery alone for resectable gastroesophageal cancer. N Engl J Med. 2006 Jul 6;355(1):11-20. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa055531.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28276825
Citation
Bringeland EA, Wasmuth HH, Gronbech JE. Perioperative chemotherapy for resectable gastric cancer - what is the evidence? Scand J Gastroenterol. 2017 Jun-Jul;52(6-7):647-653. doi: 10.1080/00365521.2017.1293727. Epub 2017 Feb 28.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24499832
Citation
Takebayashi K, Murata S, Yamamoto H, Ishida M, Yamaguchi T, Kojima M, Shimizu T, Shiomi H, Sonoda H, Naka S, Mekata E, Okabe H, Tani T. Surgery-induced peritoneal cancer cells in patients who have undergone curative gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Jun;21(6):1991-7. doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-3525-9. Epub 2014 Feb 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24850538
Citation
De Andrade JP, Mezhir JJ. The critical role of peritoneal cytology in the staging of gastric cancer: an evidence-based review. J Surg Oncol. 2014 Sep;110(3):291-7. doi: 10.1002/jso.23632. Epub 2014 May 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16862189
Citation
Minchinton AI, Tannock IF. Drug penetration in solid tumours. Nat Rev Cancer. 2006 Aug;6(8):583-92. doi: 10.1038/nrc1893.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15915368
Citation
Bentrem D, Wilton A, Mazumdar M, Brennan M, Coit D. The value of peritoneal cytology as a preoperative predictor in patients with gastric carcinoma undergoing a curative resection. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005 May;12(5):347-53. doi: 10.1245/ASO.2005.03.065. Epub 2005 Mar 31.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28138635
Citation
Ji ZH, Peng KW, Li Y. Intraperitoneal free cancer cells in gastric cancer: pathology of peritoneal carcinomatosis and rationale for intraperitoneal chemotherapy/hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in gastric cancer. Transl Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Sep 19;1:69. doi: 10.21037/tgh.2016.08.03. eCollection 2016.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
27134147
Citation
Coccolini F, Catena F, Glehen O, Yonemura Y, Sugarbaker PH, Piso P, Ceresoli M, Montori G, Ansaloni L. Effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy and peritoneal lavage in positive peritoneal cytology in gastric cancer. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Sep;42(9):1261-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2016.03.035. Epub 2016 Apr 19.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
28407227
Citation
Grass F, Vuagniaux A, Teixeira-Farinha H, Lehmann K, Demartines N, Hubner M. Systematic review of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced peritoneal carcinomatosis. Br J Surg. 2017 May;104(6):669-678. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10521.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30911669
Citation
Graversen M, Lundell L, Fristrup C, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) as an outpatient procedure. Pleura Peritoneum. 2018 Nov 27;3(4):20180128. doi: 10.1515/pp-2018-0128. eCollection 2018 Dec 1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
29899763
Citation
Graversen M, Detlefsen S, Bjerregaard JK, Fristrup CW, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Prospective, single-center implementation and response evaluation of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) for peritoneal metastasis. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2018 Jun 1;10:1758835918777036. doi: 10.1177/1758835918777036. eCollection 2018.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30911624
Citation
Graversen M, Pedersen PB, Mortensen MB. Environmental safety during the administration of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC). Pleura Peritoneum. 2016 Dec 1;1(4):203-208. doi: 10.1515/pp-2016-0019. Epub 2016 Nov 25.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30755498
Citation
Graversen M, Fristrup C, Kristensen TK, Larsen TR, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB, Detlefsen S. Detection of free intraperitoneal tumour cells in peritoneal lavage fluid from patients with peritoneal metastasis before and after treatment with pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). J Clin Pathol. 2019 May;72(5):368-372. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205683. Epub 2019 Feb 12.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

Adjuvant PIPAC in Gastric Cancer Patients

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs