Rectal CancerPhase 2CORRECTNCT02017704
Chemoradiation or Brachytherapy for Rectal Cancer
A Phase 2 study testing Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm), capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm) and IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy) in people with Rectal Cancer, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 4 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This research is being done to compare the effectiveness of high dose endorectal brachytherapy (END-HDR) and the standard treatment option of chemoradiation with Capecitabine in the treatment of cancer of the lowest part of the bowel (rectum). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 100 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Rectal Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm), capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm) and IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy)
- Type of treatment
- Injection or infusion, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 9 participants
- Where
- 4 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 12 Jun 2014to 31 Jan 2023
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 to 100 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Confirmed adenocarcinoma of the rectum
- Appropriate tumor staging and location
- Patients should be suitable candidates for surgery and chemotherapy
- ECOG/WHO performance status 0-1
- Patients must be 18 years or older
- No previous history of pelvic radiation
Show all 9Show fewer
- Patients must have acceptable organ and marrow function
- Non pregnant, non-breast feeding females under active contraception
- Ability to understand and willingness to sign a written informed consent document.
Who cannot join
- Evidence of distant metastatic disease
- Evidence of sphincter invasion on MRI
- Prior history of radiation to the pelvis
- Prior malignancy except for adequately treated basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer, cervical carcinoma in situ, DCIS, or other cancer from which the patient has been disease free for at least 3 years
- Presence of multiple small bowel loops trapped within the immediate tumor bed (post hysterectomy or prostatectomy).
- Use of any investigational agent within the 4 weeks preceding enrollment
Show all 12Show fewer
- Previous exposure to chemotherapy for rectal cancer
- Uncontrolled intercurrent illness including but not limited to, ongoing or active infections (or infections requiring systemic treatment), symptomatic congestive heart failure, unstable angina pectoris, cardiac arrhythmia, or psychiatric illness/social situations that would limit compliance with study requirements
- Pregnant and breastfeeding women are excluded, as well as women of child-bearing potential who are unwilling or unable to use an acceptable method of birth control (hormonal or barrier method of birth control; abstinence) to avoid pregnancy for the duration of the study. Should a woman become pregnant or suspect she is pregnant while participating in this study she should inform her treating physician immediately.
- Women who are not post-menopausal and have a positive urine or serum pregnancy test or refuse to take a pregnancy test.
- Contraindication for safe MRI, implants, or other conditions that interfere with imaging required for the study (e.g., pacemaker or non-MRI compatible hip prostheses). Note: Subjects with bilateral hip implants are not eligible for the study. Subjects with a unilateral hip implant may be eligible assuming the implant is MRI compatible and does not present artifact on MRI in the areas of interest.
- Subject is pacemaker dependent.
Trial locations and contacts
4 sites in 1 country.
United States4 sites
Winship Cancer Institute, Emory University
Atlanta, Georgia, 30322
The SKCCC at Johns Hopkins
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287
Beth Israel Hospital
New York, New York, 10003
Moffitt Cancer Center
Tampa, Florida, 33607
About this study
Official title: Chemoradiation OR Brachytherapy for RECTal Cancer
This research is being done to compare the effectiveness of high dose endorectal brachytherapy (END-HDR) and the standard treatment option of chemoradiation with Capecitabine in the treatment of cancer of the lowest part of the bowel (rectum).
Read the detailed description
Locally advanced rectal carcinoma continues to be a major oncologic problem in the United States with approximately 40,000 new cases diagnosed in 2011. For stage II/III rectal carcinoma, adjuvant chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision (TME) represent the major treatment advances that have increased cure rates over the past 30 years.
In the setting of TME, a landmark phase III German trial of stage II/III rectal cancer patients established neoadjuvant 5FU-based chemoradiation (NCRT) as standard of care over the same regimen given post-operatively. The preoperative arm showed superior local control (6% vs. 13% p=0.006), a complete pathologic response of 8%, a higher rate of sphincter preservation and less grade 3 toxicity compared to post-operative treatment. However, disease-free and overall survival (76% versus 74%, respectively) were no different because of the high rate of distant metastasis occurring in over 1/3 of patients (5yr DM 36 vs 38%,p=0.84). Importantly, those attaining a pathologic complete response had a decreased rate of distant metastasis and improved disease-free survival. Drawbacks to the regimen include acute grade 3 or 4 toxicity in 27% of patients, low compliance rates with postoperative chemotherapy (27 - 50%), and an overall decline in anorectal function shown by long-term studies.
Given the excellent locoregional control reported in TME surgical series, several trials have investigated whether certain patients may be spared preoperative radiotherapy. Two large randomized trials by Dutch and British investigators showed that a short preoperative course of hypofractionated EBRT (25 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by TME surgery decreased locoregional recurrence by 2/3 as compared to patients treated with TME surgery alone. In the Dutch trial, patients with mid and distal rectal cancers were most likely to benefit from radiotherapy. In these patients, preoperative radiation was shown to decrease locoregional recurrence by 5-fold (10% to 2%); however, the hypofractionated preoperative EBRT regimen was associated with a significant increase in acute and chronic morbidity. Indeed, the Dutch study revealed that irradiated patients, when compared to surgery alone, had more perineal wound healing problems after abdominoperineal resection (29% vs. 19%), worsening deterioration of anal sphincter dysfunction, and more severe long-term effects related to sexual functioning both in males (p=0.004) and females (p<0.002). Additionally, colleagues have reported a consistent negative impact on bowel function in those patients undergoing sphincter preservation. In reviewing the long-term data of the Swedish short course preoperative EBRT rectal cancer trial, Birgisson also reported a higher incidence of secondary tumors (9.5%) in patients treated with preoperative radiation when compared to patients having surgery alone (4.3%).
Modern approaches to address the risk of distant metastasis and poor compliance with adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (following NCRT) have incorporated newer effective chemotherapy agents earlier in the treatment protocol. For example, oxaliplatin has been one of the most widely studied agents as a result of its proven efficacy when combined with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) both in the metastatic and adjuvant settings for colon cancer. Initial phase II studies with the addition of oxaliplatin to standard 5-FU based NCRT appeared to show improved pathologic complete response rates compared to standard NCRT. However, two phase III trials clearly show that the addition of oxaliplatin during 5FU-based NCRT does not significantly improve pathologic complete response, locoregional control, distant metastasis or survival but does increase acute grade 3-4 toxicity by two to three-fold.
One approach to limit toxicity from external beam radiotherapy is the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). IMRT can limit radiation dose to normal rectum (above and below the tumor) and surrounding organs at risk (OARs) such as bladder and sexual organs. IMRT utilizes multiple beams of radiation to treat the rectal tumor plus a margin and limits dose to OARs. While IMRT decreases radiation dose to normal structures, it requires an additional 2-3 cm margin for microscopic extension (clinical treatment volume=CTV), set-up error, and rectal motion (planning treatment volume=PTV). Furthermore, IMRT still requires 5-6 weeks of radiation with concurrent chemotherapy, is substantially more expensive than conformal radiation, and is especially prohibitive in countries where access to technology necessary for IMRT is limited. Based on the preliminary results of RTOG 0822 and others, it still remains to be determined whether IMRT confers a statistically significant improvement in pCR, toxicity rates and QOL relative to standard NCRT.
A novel approach to limit radiation toxicity is the use of high dose rate endorectal brachytherapy (Endo-HDR). Endo-HDR involves the placement of a silicon multicatheter applicator within the rectum to deliver large doses to the rectal tumor and mesorectum with rapid dose fall off to the surrounding organs. An Iridium 192 high dose rate brachytherapy source attached to a wire is inserted into each catheter to deliver a high dose of radiation therapy the tumor. High dose rate brachytherapy has been well established in various malignancies (prostate, uterine, sarcoma, head and neck) to escalate radiation dose to the tumor over a short period of time while sparing normal tissue. Compared with NCRT and IMRT, Endo-HDR delivers treatment internally to the tumor without having to pass through surrounding normal tissue and organs. It requires smaller margins (CTV/PTV=~1 cm) on the tumor since the applicator is positioned under fiducial guidance over the tumor without need for a margin for organ motion allowing greater sparing of OARs. Furthermore, the area of the rectum exposed to high dose radiotherapy is surgically removed at the time of resection which further minimizes chronic toxicity. Important structures that may be spared include bone marrow, small bowel, bladder, the autonomic nerves, sexual organs, anal sphincter and skin. Considering that 1/3 of patients will develop metastases, limiting bone marrow toxicity may contribute to better compliance with systemic treatment and allow for a better treatment strategy to target systemic recurrence. Another distinct advantage of Endo-HDR is the shortened treatment time (1 versus 6 weeks). Endo-HDR therefore provides a major logistic advantage for patients who may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy but who are geographically distant from radiation centers, elderly, or medically infirmed.
- Conditions
- Rectal Cancer
- Being tested
- Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm), capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm), IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy), FOLFOX6, Surgery
- Keywords
- Endorectal Brachytherapy Radiation Therapy, Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Capecitabine
- Medical subject headings
- Rectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm)Radiation
Patients will be treated with a daily dose of 6.5 Gy over four consecutive days for a total of 26 Gy
capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm)Drug
Also called Xeloda
Capecitabine shall be delivered at 825mg/m2 BID during IMRT radiotherapy
IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy)Radiation
Patients will receive IMRT along with capecitabine. External radiotherapy will be based on contouring guidelines from the RTOG atlas and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0822) with some modifications
FOLFOX6Drug
Also called Oxaliplatin, Leucovorin, 5 Fluorouracil
- Oxaliplatin - 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion
- Leucovorin - bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions
- 5 Fluorouracil (5FU) - 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus An outpatient, 46 hour continuous IV infusion provided by a home IV infusion company. The 5FU is delivered by a small pump worn in a fanny pack around the waist. The home IV infusion company will arrange your disconnect at the end of the infusion.
SurgeryProcedure or surgery
After the patient has been identified as a candidate for the trial, the surgeon will assess the patient and will determine:
Exact height and location of tumor with regards to the anal margin as measured by a rigid or flexible proctoscope and/or digital exam.
Mobility of tumor as assessed if possible by rectal exam Type of surgical procedure: Abdominoperineal resection vs. sphincter saving procedures, which will include colo-anal with mucosectomy vs. stapled anastomosis.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| IMRT and Capecitabine | Active comparator | Patients will receive IMRT along with capecitabine. External radiotherapy will be based on contouring guidelines from the RTOG atlas and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0822) with some modifications
Followed by:
* Oxaliplatin: 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion
* 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions
* 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus
Cycle length: 14 days (2 weeks)
Duration of treatment: 12 cycles
Then: Surgical Resection Receives: Drug: capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm); Radiation: IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy); Drug: FOLFOX6; Procedure: Surgery |
| Endo-HDR | Experimental | Patients will be treated with a daily dose of 6.5 Gy over four consecutive days for a total of 26 Gy
Followed by:
* Oxaliplatin: 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion
* 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions
* 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus
Cycle length: 14 days (2 weeks)
Duration of treatment: 12 cycles
Then: Surgical Resection Receives: Radiation: Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm); Drug: FOLFOX6; Procedure: Surgery |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Patients With Pathologic Complete Response
Pathologic complete response rate is reported as the number of patients who achieve pathologic complete response after the treatment for each arm.
As per the NCCN guidelines, pathologic response is graded by the system recommended by the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual and CAP guidelines:
- Complete response - no remaining viable cancer cells
- Moderate response - only small clusters/single cancer cells remain
- Minimal response - residual cancer remaining, but with predominant fibrosis
- Poor response - minimal/no tumor kills, extensive residual cancer
Measured: Up to 60 months
Secondary outcomes (6)
Number of Participants With Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events
Number of participants with grade 3 or higher adverse events will be listed by relationship.
Grading is by CTCAE 4 guidelines.
Relationship, as determined by PI, is unrelated/unlikely/possible/probable/definite.
Measured: Up to 60 months
Change in EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status Score
Patients were given the EORTC QLQ-C30 at baseline, preop, postop, and at follow ups Y1-5. The forms were scored as per the manual available at EORTC. Raw scores are transformed to fall in a range of 0-100. Generally, higher scores on QoL scales represent higher levels of QoL.
The scores are reported as the mean of the Global Health Status/QoL scale score when more than 1 patient completed the form for a time point. If only 1 form was available for a time point, then the score for that form is reported.
Measured: baseline, preop, postop, and at follow ups Y1-5
Time to Death
Assessing the difference time to death rates among study participants.
Measured: Up to 60 months
Time to Distant Metastases Free Survival
Compare distant metastasis for both Endo-HDR and CRT.
Measured: Up to 60 months
Time to Progression Free Survival
Compare progression free survival for both Endo-HDR and CRT.
Measured: Up to 60 months
Time to Local Disease Recurrence
Compare locoregional control for both Endo-HDR and CRT.
Measured: Up to 60 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted23 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Study start12 Jun 2014
- Primary completion30 Sep 2021
- Study completion31 Jan 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Other trials for Rectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Elekta Limited
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Amol K Narang, M.D., Principal investigator, The SKCCC at Johns Hopkins
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02017704
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- J1360
- Other IDs
- NA_00082167
- Acronym
- CORRECT
- Status last verified
- Oct 2023
- First submitted
- 5 Dec 2013
- Last updated
- 17 Oct 2023
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Oct 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Chemoradiation OR Brachytherapy for RECTal Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02017704
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CORRECT / J1360
- Conditions
- Rectal Cancer
- Keywords
- Endorectal Brachytherapy Radiation Therapy, Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy and Capecitabine
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 9 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Elekta Limited
- Study start
- 12 Jun 2014 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Sep 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Jan 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 23 Dec 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 24 Feb 2023
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This research is being done to compare the effectiveness of high dose endorectal brachytherapy (END-HDR) and the standard treatment option of chemoradiation with Capecitabine in the treatment of cancer of the lowest part of the bowel (rectum).
Detailed description
Locally advanced rectal carcinoma continues to be a major oncologic problem in the United States with approximately 40,000 new cases diagnosed in 2011. For stage II/III rectal carcinoma, adjuvant chemoradiation and total mesorectal excision (TME) represent the major treatment advances that have increased cure rates over the past 30 years.
In the setting of TME, a landmark phase III German trial of stage II/III rectal cancer patients established neoadjuvant 5FU-based chemoradiation (NCRT) as standard of care over the same regimen given post-operatively. The preoperative arm showed superior local control (6% vs. 13% p=0.006), a complete pathologic response of 8%, a higher rate of sphincter preservation and less grade 3 toxicity compared to post-operative treatment. However, disease-free and overall survival (76% versus 74%, respectively) were no different because of the high rate of distant metastasis occurring in over 1/3 of patients (5yr DM 36 vs 38%,p=0.84). Importantly, those attaining a pathologic complete response had a decreased rate of distant metastasis and improved disease-free survival. Drawbacks to the regimen include acute grade 3 or 4 toxicity in 27% of patients, low compliance rates with postoperative chemotherapy (27 - 50%), and an overall decline in anorectal function shown by long-term studies.
Given the excellent locoregional control reported in TME surgical series, several trials have investigated whether certain patients may be spared preoperative radiotherapy. Two large randomized trials by Dutch and British investigators showed that a short preoperative course of hypofractionated EBRT (25 Gy in 5 fractions) followed by TME surgery decreased locoregional recurrence by 2/3 as compared to patients treated with TME surgery alone. In the Dutch trial, patients with mid and distal rectal cancers were most likely to benefit from radiotherapy. In these patients, preoperative radiation was shown to decrease locoregional recurrence by 5-fold (10% to 2%); however, the hypofractionated preoperative EBRT regimen was associated with a significant increase in acute and chronic morbidity. Indeed, the Dutch study revealed that irradiated patients, when compared to surgery alone, had more perineal wound healing problems after abdominoperineal resection (29% vs. 19%), worsening deterioration of anal sphincter dysfunction, and more severe long-term effects related to sexual functioning both in males (p=0.004) and females (p<0.002). Additionally, colleagues have reported a consistent negative impact on bowel function in those patients undergoing sphincter preservation. In reviewing the long-term data of the Swedish short course preoperative EBRT rectal cancer trial, Birgisson also reported a higher incidence of secondary tumors (9.5%) in patients treated with preoperative radiation when compared to patients having surgery alone (4.3%).
Modern approaches to address the risk of distant metastasis and poor compliance with adjuvant systemic chemotherapy (following NCRT) have incorporated newer effective chemotherapy agents earlier in the treatment protocol. For example, oxaliplatin has been one of the most widely studied agents as a result of its proven efficacy when combined with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) both in the metastatic and adjuvant settings for colon cancer. Initial phase II studies with the addition of oxaliplatin to standard 5-FU based NCRT appeared to show improved pathologic complete response rates compared to standard NCRT. However, two phase III trials clearly show that the addition of oxaliplatin during 5FU-based NCRT does not significantly improve pathologic complete response, locoregional control, distant metastasis or survival but does increase acute grade 3-4 toxicity by two to three-fold.
One approach to limit toxicity from external beam radiotherapy is the use of intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). IMRT can limit radiation dose to normal rectum (above and below the tumor) and surrounding organs at risk (OARs) such as bladder and sexual organs. IMRT utilizes multiple beams of radiation to treat the rectal tumor plus a margin and limits dose to OARs. While IMRT decreases radiation dose to normal structures, it requires an additional 2-3 cm margin for microscopic extension (clinical treatment volume=CTV), set-up error, and rectal motion (planning treatment volume=PTV). Furthermore, IMRT still requires 5-6 weeks of radiation with concurrent chemotherapy, is substantially more expensive than conformal radiation, and is especially prohibitive in countries where access to technology necessary for IMRT is limited. Based on the preliminary results of RTOG 0822 and others, it still remains to be determined whether IMRT confers a statistically significant improvement in pCR, toxicity rates and QOL relative to standard NCRT.
A novel approach to limit radiation toxicity is the use of high dose rate endorectal brachytherapy (Endo-HDR). Endo-HDR involves the placement of a silicon multicatheter applicator within the rectum to deliver large doses to the rectal tumor and mesorectum with rapid dose fall off to the surrounding organs. An Iridium 192 high dose rate brachytherapy source attached to a wire is inserted into each catheter to deliver a high dose of radiation therapy the tumor. High dose rate brachytherapy has been well established in various malignancies (prostate, uterine, sarcoma, head and neck) to escalate radiation dose to the tumor over a short period of time while sparing normal tissue. Compared with NCRT and IMRT, Endo-HDR delivers treatment internally to the tumor without having to pass through surrounding normal tissue and organs. It requires smaller margins (CTV/PTV=~1 cm) on the tumor since the applicator is positioned under fiducial guidance over the tumor without need for a margin for organ motion allowing greater sparing of OARs. Furthermore, the area of the rectum exposed to high dose radiotherapy is surgically removed at the time of resection which further minimizes chronic toxicity. Important structures that may be spared include bone marrow, small bowel, bladder, the autonomic nerves, sexual organs, anal sphincter and skin. Considering that 1/3 of patients will develop metastases, limiting bone marrow toxicity may contribute to better compliance with systemic treatment and allow for a better treatment strategy to target systemic recurrence. Another distinct advantage of Endo-HDR is the shortened treatment time (1 versus 6 weeks). Endo-HDR therefore provides a major logistic advantage for patients who may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy but who are geographically distant from radiation centers, elderly, or medically infirmed.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| IMRT and Capecitabine | Active comparator | Drug: capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm), Radiation: IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy), Drug: FOLFOX6, Procedure: SurgeryPatients will receive IMRT along with capecitabine. External radiotherapy will be based on contouring guidelines from the RTOG atlas and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0822) with some modifications Followed by: * Oxaliplatin: 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion * 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions * 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus Cycle length: 14 days (2 weeks) Duration of treatment: 12 cycles Then: Surgical Resection |
| Endo-HDR | Experimental | Radiation: Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm), Drug: FOLFOX6, Procedure: SurgeryPatients will be treated with a daily dose of 6.5 Gy over four consecutive days for a total of 26 Gy Followed by: * Oxaliplatin: 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion * 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions * 5-FU continuous infusion 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus Cycle length: 14 days (2 weeks) Duration of treatment: 12 cycles Then: Surgical Resection |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 100 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Confirmed adenocarcinoma of the rectum
- Appropriate tumor staging and location
- Patients should be suitable candidates for surgery and chemotherapy
- ECOG/WHO performance status 0-1
- Patients must be 18 years or older
Key exclusion criteria (12 listed)
- Evidence of distant metastatic disease
- Evidence of sphincter invasion on MRI
- Prior history of radiation to the pelvis
- Prior malignancy except for adequately treated basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer, cervical carcinoma in situ, DCIS, or other cancer from which the patient has been disease free for at least 3 years
- Presence of multiple small bowel loops trapped within the immediate tumor bed (post hysterectomy or prostatectomy).
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm)Patients will be treated with a daily dose of 6.5 Gy over four consecutive days for a total of 26 Gy | Radiation | Endo-HDR |
| capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm)Also: XelodaCapecitabine shall be delivered at 825mg/m2 BID during IMRT radiotherapy | Drug | IMRT and Capecitabine |
| IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy)Patients will receive IMRT along with capecitabine. External radiotherapy will be based on contouring guidelines from the RTOG atlas and Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG 0822) with some modifications | Radiation | IMRT and Capecitabine |
| FOLFOX6Also: Oxaliplatin, Leucovorin, 5 Fluorouracil* Oxaliplatin - 85 mg/m² in 500ml glucose 5% solution, 2-h infusion * Leucovorin - bolus 400mg/m² following the oxaliplatin/FA infusions * 5 Fluorouracil (5FU) - 2400 mg/m², 46-h infusion following the 5-FU bolus An outpatient, 46 hour continuous IV infusion provided by a home IV infusion company. The 5FU is delivered by a small pump worn in a fanny pack around the waist. The home IV infusion company will arrange your disconnect at the end of the infusion. | Drug | Endo-HDR, IMRT and Capecitabine |
| SurgeryAfter the patient has been identified as a candidate for the trial, the surgeon will assess the patient and will determine: Exact height and location of tumor with regards to the anal margin as measured by a rigid or flexible proctoscope and/or digital exam. Mobility of tumor as assessed if possible by rectal exam Type of surgical procedure: Abdominoperineal resection vs. sphincter saving procedures, which will include colo-anal with mucosectomy vs. stapled anastomosis. | Procedure or surgery | Endo-HDR, IMRT and Capecitabine |
Primary outcome
Number of Patients With Pathologic Complete Response
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Pathologic complete response rate is reported as the number of patients who achieve pathologic complete response after the treatment for each arm. As per the NCCN guidelines, pathologic response is graded by the system recommended by the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual and CAP guidelines: * Complete response - no remaining viable cancer cells * Moderate response - only small clusters/single cancer cells remain * Minimal response - residual cancer remaining, but with predominant fibrosis * Poor response - minimal/no tumor kills, extensive residual cancer
6 secondary outcomes
Number of Participants With Grade 3 or Higher Adverse Events
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Change in EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status Score
Time frame: baseline, preop, postop, and at follow ups Y1-5
Time to Death
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Time to Distant Metastases Free Survival
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Time to Progression Free Survival
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Time to Local Disease Recurrence
Time frame: Up to 60 months
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Oct 2023.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Rectal Cancer
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
A Beta-only IL-2 ImmunoTherapY Study
Advanced Solid Tumor, Unresectable Solid Tumor
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study of MGC030 in Participants With Advanced Solid Tumors
Urothelial Cancer, GastroEsophageal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Exploratory Study of Short-Course Radiotherapy Followed by Adebrelimab Combined With Chemotherapy for Organ Preservation in Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Locally Advanced Resectable Rectal Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
ABCSG R07 Rectal Cancer Registry
Rectal Cancer, Adenocarcinoma of Rectum
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Amol K Narang, M.D. principal investigator
The SKCCC at Johns Hopkins
4 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing Endo-HDR (if randomized to this arm), capecitabine and IMRT (if randomized to this arm) and IMRT (intensity modulated radiation therapy) in people with Rectal Cancer, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 4 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 9 inclusion and 12 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 17 Oct 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 4 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 24 Feb 2023). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Number of Patients With Pathologic Complete Response (time frame: Up to 60 months). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 17 Oct 2023.