search
Back to results

Efficacy and Safety of IRE for RMs

Primary Purpose

Kidney Cancer

Status
Unknown status
Phase
Phase 1
Locations
Netherlands
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Nano Knife
Sponsored by
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional treatment trial for Kidney Cancer focused on measuring Renal mass, Kidney cancer, Irreversibel Electroporation, Ablation, Safety, Efficacy, IRE

Eligibility Criteria

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

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Age ≥ 18 years
  • Solid, enhancing mass on cross sectional imaging
  • Scheduled for a radical nephrectomy, open or laparoscopic.
  • Signed informed consent

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Irreversible bleeding disorders
  • Inability/unwillingness to interrupt anticoagulation therapy
  • Previous cryoablation, RFA or partial nephrectomy in affected kidney
  • Anaesthesia Surgical Assignment (ASA), category ≤ IV
  • ICD / pacemaker
  • Severe cardiovascular disease in medical history

Sites / Locations

  • Dept. Urology, Academic Medical Center, AmsterdamRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm Type

Experimental

Arm Label

Irreversible Electroporation

Arm Description

Percutaneous, CT guided, Irreversible Electroporation of renal mass

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

The efficacy of IRE ablation of renal masses , measured by histopathologic examination of the targeted tumour by an experienced genitourinary pathologist. Using immunehistochemical staining to evaluate cell viability.
Number of device and procedural adverse events using CTCAE v4.0.

Secondary Outcome Measures

The efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success
The efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing MRI imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material.
The efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success
The efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing CEUS imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material.

Full Information

First Posted
November 20, 2014
Last Updated
November 21, 2014
Sponsor
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT02298608
Brief Title
Efficacy and Safety of IRE for RMs
Official Title
The Efficacy and Safety of Irreversible Electroporation for the Ablation of Renal Masses: A Prospective, Human, In-Vivo Study.
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
November 2014
Overall Recruitment Status
Unknown status
Study Start Date
January 2014 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
January 2016 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 2016 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)

4. Oversight

Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
Background: Electroporation or electropermeabilisation is a novel technique with the potential to overcome the main disadvantages of thermal ablation. It utilizes electric pulses, traveling between two or more electrodes, to create 'nanopores' in the cell membrane. If the applied current reaches a certain threshold these 'nanopores' become permanent resulting in cell death. The use of electric current means that IRE is not susceptible to 'thermal sink' leading to consistent ablation results. IRE ablation targets the cell membrane, sparing tissue architecture and minimizing damage to blood vessels, nerves and the renal collecting system. The first in human studies have proven the safety of IRE for the ablation of small renal masses. However the efficacy of IRE through histopathological examination of an ablated renal tumour has not yet been studied, compromising the correct and scientific evaluation of this new technology. Primary Objectives: To determine the efficacy of IRE ablation of renal masses , measured by histopathologic examination of the targeted tumour. To determine the safety of IRE ablation of renal masses, by evaluating device and procedural adverse events. Secondary Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. To evaluate the efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. Population: 10 patients, age ≥ 18 years, presenting with a solid enhancing mass, who are candidates for radical nephrectomy. Intervention: Eligible patients will receive IRE ablation of their renal mass 4 weeks prior to radical nephrectomy. Follow-up at one and four weeks post IRE will be performed using MRI and CEUS imaging. After radical nephrectomy histopathological examination will be performed to evaluate IRE ablation success.
Detailed Description
Rationale: The past decades have shown an increase in the incidence of small renal masses (SRM). At the moment laparoscopic partial nephrectomy is the 'golden standard' in treatment of SRMs. Thermal ablation techniques are indicated in patients who are poor surgical candidates or who have a predisposition to develop multiple tumours. Recent studies have shown thermal ablation techniques to have similar long-term oncologic results. Downsides to thermal ablation are the possible damage to vital structures in the vicinity of the ablation zone, e.g. collecting system or intestine, and unpredictable results due to difficulty in monitoring the ablation zone and 'thermal sink'. Electroporation or electropermeabilisation is a novel technique with the potential to overcome the main disadvantages of thermal ablation. It utilizes electric pulses, traveling between two or more electrodes, to create 'nanopores' in the cell membrane. If the applied current reaches a certain threshold these 'nanopores' become permanent resulting in cell death. The use of electric current means that IRE is not susceptible to 'thermal sink' leading to consistent ablation results. IRE ablation targets the cell membrane, sparing tissue architecture and minimizing damage to blood vessels, nerves and the renal collecting system. The first in human studies have proven the safety of IRE for the ablation of small renal masses. However the efficacy of IRE through histopathological examination of an ablated renal tumour has not yet been studied, compromising the correct and scientific evaluation of a new technology. This is the primary objective of this research project. Objectives: Primary Objectives: To determine the efficacy of IRE ablation of renal masses , measured by histopathologic examination of the targeted tumour. To determine the safety of IRE ablation of renal masses, by evaluating device and procedural adverse events. Secondary Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. To evaluate the efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. Study design: This is a prospective, human, in-vivo pilot study. Study population: 10 patients, age ≥ 18 years, presented with a solid enhancing RM , who are candidates for radical nephrectomy. Intervention: Patients will receive IRE ablation of the RM, performed under general anaesthesia, 4 weeks before radical nephrectomy. Follow-up at one and four weeks post IRE will be performed using MRI and CEUS imaging. After radical nephrectomy histopathological examination will be performed to evaluate IRE ablation success. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary endpoints: The efficacy of IRE ablation of renal masses , measured by histopathologic examination of the targeted tumour by an experienced genitourinary pathologist. Using immunehistochemical staining to evaluate cell viability. The safety of IRE ablation of renal masses, by evaluating device and procedural adverse events using CTCAE v4.0. Secondary endpoints: The efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing MRI imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material. The efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing CEUS imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material. Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: There are no benefits for patients that participate in this study. Study participants will be exposed to additional risk when compared to standard treatment. They will have to undergo an additional procedure under general anaesthesia with muscle relaxation. The exposure to ionizing radiation during the procedure has been estimated at 32 mSv. Patients have to be informed about the risks of procedural complications. Information on the efficacy of IRE, proven histopathologically, is a vital step in order to progress to long term follow-up studies without tumour excision. So far no study has investigated the efficacy of IRE for the ablation of renal tumours in this manner.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Kidney Cancer
Keywords
Renal mass, Kidney cancer, Irreversibel Electroporation, Ablation, Safety, Efficacy, IRE

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Treatment
Study Phase
Phase 1, Phase 2
Interventional Study Model
Single Group Assignment
Masking
None (Open Label)
Allocation
N/A
Enrollment
10 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Irreversible Electroporation
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Percutaneous, CT guided, Irreversible Electroporation of renal mass
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Nano Knife
Other Intervention Name(s)
Irreversible Electroporation
Intervention Description
Percutaneous, CT guided, ablation of renal mass
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
The efficacy of IRE ablation of renal masses , measured by histopathologic examination of the targeted tumour by an experienced genitourinary pathologist. Using immunehistochemical staining to evaluate cell viability.
Time Frame
1 month
Title
Number of device and procedural adverse events using CTCAE v4.0.
Time Frame
1 month
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
The efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success
Description
The efficacy of MRI in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing MRI imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material.
Time Frame
1 month
Title
The efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success
Description
The efficacy of CEUS in the imaging of ablation success, extend of the ablation zone, one and four weeks post IRE ablation. By comparing CEUS imaging to the histopathological examination results of the resected material.
Time Frame
1 month

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: Age ≥ 18 years Solid, enhancing mass on cross sectional imaging Scheduled for a radical nephrectomy, open or laparoscopic. Signed informed consent Exclusion Criteria: Irreversible bleeding disorders Inability/unwillingness to interrupt anticoagulation therapy Previous cryoablation, RFA or partial nephrectomy in affected kidney Anaesthesia Surgical Assignment (ASA), category ≤ IV ICD / pacemaker Severe cardiovascular disease in medical history
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Prof. M. Pilar Laguna Pes, M.D. Ph.D.
Phone
+31(0)20-5668637
Email
m.p.lagunapes@amc.nl
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Peter GK Wagstaff, M.D.
Phone
+31(0)205666493
Email
p.g.wagstaff@amc.nl
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Prof. M. Pilar Laguna Pes, M.D. Ph.D.
Organizational Affiliation
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Prof. Jean J de la Rosette, M.D. Ph.D.
Organizational Affiliation
Academisch Medisch Centrum - Universiteit van Amsterdam (AMC-UvA)
Official's Role
Study Chair
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Dept. Urology, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam
City
Amsterdam
Country
Netherlands
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Prof. M. Pilar Laguna Pes, M.D. Ph.D.
Phone
+31(0)20-5668637
Email
m.p.lagunapes@amc.nl
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Peter GK Wagstaff, M.D.
Phone
+31(0)205666493
Email
p.g.wagstaff@amc.nl

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Citations:
PubMed Identifier
25886058
Citation
Wagstaff PG, de Bruin DM, Zondervan PJ, Savci Heijink CD, Engelbrecht MR, van Delden OM, van Leeuwen TG, Wijkstra H, de la Rosette JJ, Laguna Pes MP. The efficacy and safety of irreversible electroporation for the ablation of renal masses: a prospective, human, in-vivo study protocol. BMC Cancer. 2015 Mar 22;15:165. doi: 10.1186/s12885-015-1189-x.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Efficacy and Safety of IRE for RMs

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs