Peritoneal CarcinomatosisPhase 2NCT02320448
Treating Peritoneal Carcinomatosis With PIPAC
A Phase 2 study testing PIPAC in people with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis, run by Michael Bau Mortensen at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
This is a feasibility study that aims to evaluate whether PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) is a safe and feasible treatment in Danish patients with peritoneal cancer. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
- What is being tested?
- PIPAC
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 35 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- Mar 2015to Aug 2017
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Histological or cytological verified malignancy.
- Clinical or radiological evidence of peritoneal carcinomatosis.
- No indication for standard chemotherapy.
- Performance status 0-2 and life expectancy of more than 3 months.
- Age > 18 years.
- Written informed consent must be obtained according to the local Ethics Committee requirements.
Who cannot join
- Symptomatic small bowel obstruction (Total parenteral nutrition, nasogastric tube).
- Previous treatment with maximum cumulative doses of doxorubicin, daunorubicin, epirubicin, idarubicin, and/or other anthracyclines and anthracenediones.
- A history of allergic reaction to cisplatin or other platinum containing compounds or doxorubicin.
- Renal impairment, defined as GFR < 50 ml/min, (Cockcroft-Gault Equation).
- Myocardial insufficiency, defined as NYHA class > 2.
- Impaired liver function defined as bilirubin ≥ 1,5 x UNL (upper normal limit).
Show all 9Show fewer
- Inadequate haematological function defined as ANC ≤ 1.5 x 109/l and platelets ≤ 100 x 109/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.
- Previous intraabdominal chemotherapy or intraabdominal antibody therapy.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Implementation and Evaluation of PIPAC for the Treatment of Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis - a Feasibility Study.
This is a feasibility study that aims to evaluate whether PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) is a safe and feasible treatment in Danish patients with peritoneal cancer.
Read the detailed description
Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) represents end stage disease in many types of cancer (e.g. gastric, pancreatic, liver, colo-rectal, ovarian) and the majority of patients with PC will die from their disease within 6 months. Platinum-based systemic chemotherapy (SC) may prolong survival in selected patients, but poor performance status and low response rates have led to conservative (nihilistic) treatment strategies in these patients. However, patients with PC who are in good condition, and with a remaining life expectancy of more than a few months, may still have an unmet need for additional treatment in order to be able to perform with a high quality of life for as long as possible. These patients often have tried several lines of SC with disappointing results, and alternative and more effective treatment strategies are desperately needed.
The installation of chemotherapeutic agents within the peritoneal cavity would seem a simple and effective treatment of PC - at least from a theoretical point of view. Unfortunately, the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy on PC is disappointing. Like with SC, the poor response rates may be explained by the poor penetration of the active chemical substances into the PC plaques. Combining cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with intraperitoneal chemotherapy has gained interest in the recent years, but this approach can only be used in highly selected patients (where CRS is possible), and the procedure carries a significant risk of complications and side effects. Thus, a minimally invasive and safe delivery of relevant chemotherapy in such concentration that may allow it to work efficiently on the PC plaques would be an ideal platform for a new treatment strategy in these patients.
Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Temperature and pressure are important factors during absorption of fluid from the peritoneal cavity, and the use of a relative low intraperitoneal pressure (2-6 mmHg) seems to increase the inflow of intraperitoneal fluid into the abdominal wall. Studies have confirmed that higher tissue concentrations of chemotherapy may be obtained by increasing the intraperitoneal pressure. After years of extensive testing, and the development of a micro-pump for safe aerosol infusion, a German research group has designed a system that allows a laparoscopy controlled, intraperitoneal aerosol infusion of chemotherapy (doxorubicin and cisplatin). The aerosol technique ensures that the entire peritoneal surface is covered by chemotherapy, and this is relevant in patients with PC. With the micro-pump positioned through a standard trocar pointing away from the bowels, a commercially available injection pump provides the necessary pressure to induce an aerosol mist covering the peritoneal cavity. After five minutes, the chemotherapy has been delivered, and the injector is turned off. After an additional 25 minutes of simple diffusion, the intra-abdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a standard trocar.
Recently, a German research group published their preliminary experience with PIPAC in gastric and ovarian cancer patients with PC .
PIPAC is not available freely on the market, and the procedure is not FDA approved yet. The German research team has emphasized, that despite the very encouraging results obtained so far, the efficacy and safety of PIPAC still has to be assessed in adequate clinical trials.
Aim In a compassionate use program, the aim of this study is to implement and evaluate the PIPAC procedure at Odense University Hospital under strict observation of both patient and occupational health safety aspects. Thus, it is important to emphasize, that the primary aim of this feasibility study is a quick and safe implementation of a new combined surgical-oncologic treatment technique which uses conventional chemotherapy in a new way in desperately ill cancer patients. For technical and safety reasons this implementation needs to be fulfilled and documented before patients can be enrolled in clinical trials.
Hypothesis The investigators expect the PIPAC procedure to be feasible and safe, with a primary non-access ratio of maximum 7:35 (mainly due to adhesions). The investigators expect a CTCAE grade of no more than 3 and that the procedure is safe for both patients, surgeons and OR staff.
Method
Study design This is a feasibility study where the PIPAC procedure will be performed in 35 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria.
Implementation of the PIPAC procedure In order to cover all safety aspects and to secure optimal treatment results, a complete manual and checklist for the entire PIPAC procedure, as well as for pre- and postoperative patient handling, has been made. Thus, every step of the procedure is carefully described and monitored, and prior to the first patient treatment, the entire PIPAC procedure will be tried in a "dummy" OR setup supervised by the German group. Although this group has documented, that the procedure is safe for both patients and health care workers, the procedure will only be performed in an OR with laminar airflow and a closed carbon dioxide (CO2) ventilation system. In addition, environmental measurements (platinum particles within the OR) and bio-monitoring (blood samples) of the OR team are scheduled from the beginning of the first PIPAC procedure.
Preliminary clinical evaluation 35 patients with PC (see inclusion criteria) will be scheduled for PIPAC. In collaboration with the German group, the local multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting will carefully select patients suitable for the PIPAC procedure. These patients are included according to national regulations and rules on experimental cancer research. All PIPAC procedures are performed with prophylactic antibiotics and start with a classification of the extent of the PC (Peritoneal Cancer Index, PCI) followed by selected quadrant biopsies to document malignancy and for later translational research. The type and doses of chemotherapy (1/10 of systemic dose), intra-abdominal pressure, temperature and delivery time are similar to those used by the German group. After the PIPAC procedure, the patients will be observed for two days before discharge. The treatment response is monitored by CT, and by a follow-up laparoscopy procedure with PCI score and biopsies after six weeks. The PIPAC procedure will be repeated during the same evaluation laparoscopy if objective response or no progression is observed. Adverse medical events will be graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 4.0), and surgical related complications according to the Dindo-Clavien classification.
Intra-abdominal access and completion of the PIPAC procedure in 28 of 35 patients and discharge of the same group within 2 POD are considered a successful implementation of the PIPAC procedure.
Occupational health safety aspects For safety reasons no staff is in the OR during the PIPAC procedure. The injector is controlled by a footswitch from outside the OR room, and observation monitors related to the anesthesiology are also made visible from outside the OR. Since no personnel are inside the ventilated OR room during application of the aerosolized chemotherapy, there are three barriers between surgeons/OR staff and the chemotherapy: The closed abdominal cavity, the laminar airflow system and the OR walls. The tightness of the abdominal cavity is controlled by allowing a maximum CO2 flow of 0.1-0.2 L/min corresponding to the body resorption of CO2. After the procedure, intraabdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a series of filters and into a closed system. Closure of the trocar sites, removal and disposal of dressings and syringes into special chemotherapy waste bins are performed by the surgeon alone. Environmental biomonitoring and blood samples from the surgeons and OR staff are scheduled as part of the safety monitoring.
Patient safety All patients are carefully selected (see exclusion criteria) on the MDT. The establishing of pneumoperitoneum and use of trocars are based on the highest standards for laparoscopic surgery which have a high safety profile. The procedures are performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons under the supervision of the German team. When following the safety protocol used by the German group, no mortality related to the PIPAC procedure has been observed. The risk of bowel perforation is 2 per mille, port site metastases occur in 0.6% of the procedures, and self- limiting erythema around the trocar site is found in 1.2% of the procedures (private communication, professor Marc A. Reymond).
A short period of postoperative fever and/or elevated acute phase proteins have been observed after the PIPAC procedure, but the majority of patients may be discharged the same or the following day, and the PIPAC procedure can be repeated several times.
- Conditions
- Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
- Being tested
- PIPAC
- Medical subject headings
- Peritoneal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PIPACDrug
Also called Cisplatin, Doxorubicin, Oxaliplatin
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| PIPAC | Experimental | PIPAC with cisplatin (7.5mg/m2 in 150 ml saline) and doxorubicin (1.5mg/m2 in 50 ml saline) in patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from any origin besides colorectal/appendiceal cancers in whom oxaliplatin (92mg/m2 in 150 ml dextrose) will be used.
The aerosolised chemotherapy will be nebulized at a flow of 0.5ml/min at a maximum pressure of 200 PSI during a standard laparoscopy with an intraabdominal pressure of 12mmHg. The CO2 will be evacuated 30 minutes after administration of chemotherapy and the patient is closed similar to a standard laparoscopy. Receives: Drug: PIPAC |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Patients with Adverse Events.
No patients with adverse events above grade 3 on the CTCAE (Version 4) scale. No patients with complications above grade 2 on the Dindo-Clavien classification.
Measured: 5 months.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Occupational health.
No detectable chemotherapy on environmental biomonitoring and blood samples from the surgeons and OR staff.
Measured: 5 months.
Feasibility: Completion of procedure in 28:35
Completion of procedure in 28:35.
Measured: 5 months.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted19 Dec 2014 (estimated)
- Study startMar 2015
- Primary completionAug 2017
- Study completionAug 2017
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (11)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Peritoneal CarcinomatosisStudies 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
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 35 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Michael Bau Mortensen
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Michael Bau Mortensen, Odense University Hospital
- Investigators
- Michael Mortensen, Professor, Study director, Odense University Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02320448
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PIPAC
- Status last verified
- Sep 2017
- First submitted
- 9 Dec 2014
- Last updated
- 12 Sep 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Sugarbaker PH. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery for the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis and sarcomatosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1998 Apr-May;14(3):254-61. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2388(199804/05)14:33.0.co;2-u.
PubMed 9548609Coccolini F, Gheza F, Lotti M, Virzi S, Iusco D, Ghermandi C, Melotti R, Baiocchi G, Giulini SM, Ansaloni L, Catena F. Peritoneal carcinomatosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 7;19(41):6979-94. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.6979.
PubMed 24222942Flessner MF. The transport barrier in intraperitoneal therapy. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005 Mar;288(3):F433-42. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00313.2004.
PubMed 15692055Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
PubMed 15273542Jacquet P, Stuart OA, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Effects of intra-abdominal pressure on pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of doxorubicin after intraperitoneal administration. Anticancer Drugs. 1996 Jul;7(5):596-603. doi: 10.1097/00001813-199607000-00016.
PubMed 8862729Tempfer CB, Celik I, Solass W, Buerkle B, Pabst UG, Zieren J, Strumberg D, Reymond MA. Activity of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) with cisplatin and doxorubicin in women with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: preliminary clinical experience. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Feb;132(2):307-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.022. Epub 2013 Nov 23.
PubMed 24275155Solass W, Kerb R, Murdter T, Giger-Pabst U, Strumberg D, Tempfer C, Zieren J, Schwab M, Reymond MA. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy of peritoneal carcinomatosis using pressurized aerosol as an alternative to liquid solution: first evidence for efficacy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Feb;21(2):553-9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3213-1. Epub 2013 Sep 5.
PubMed 24006094Blanco A, Giger-Pabst U, Solass W, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Renal and hepatic toxicities after pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jul;20(7):2311-6. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2840-2. Epub 2013 Feb 3.
PubMed 23377563Solass W, Giger-Pabst U, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): occupational health and safety aspects. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Oct;20(11):3504-11. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3039-x. Epub 2013 Jun 14.
PubMed 23765417Graversen 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.
PubMed 30755498Graversen 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.
PubMed 29899763
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 12 Sep 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Implementation and Evaluation of PIPAC for the Treatment of Patients With Peritoneal Carcinomatosis - a Feasibility Study.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02320448
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PIPAC
- Conditions
- Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 35 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Michael Bau MortensenUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- Study completion
- Aug 2017 (actual)
- First posted
- 19 Dec 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This is a feasibility study that aims to evaluate whether PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) is a safe and feasible treatment in Danish patients with peritoneal cancer.
Detailed description
Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) represents end stage disease in many types of cancer (e.g. gastric, pancreatic, liver, colo-rectal, ovarian) and the majority of patients with PC will die from their disease within 6 months. Platinum-based systemic chemotherapy (SC) may prolong survival in selected patients, but poor performance status and low response rates have led to conservative (nihilistic) treatment strategies in these patients. However, patients with PC who are in good condition, and with a remaining life expectancy of more than a few months, may still have an unmet need for additional treatment in order to be able to perform with a high quality of life for as long as possible. These patients often have tried several lines of SC with disappointing results, and alternative and more effective treatment strategies are desperately needed.
The installation of chemotherapeutic agents within the peritoneal cavity would seem a simple and effective treatment of PC - at least from a theoretical point of view. Unfortunately, the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy on PC is disappointing. Like with SC, the poor response rates may be explained by the poor penetration of the active chemical substances into the PC plaques. Combining cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with intraperitoneal chemotherapy has gained interest in the recent years, but this approach can only be used in highly selected patients (where CRS is possible), and the procedure carries a significant risk of complications and side effects. Thus, a minimally invasive and safe delivery of relevant chemotherapy in such concentration that may allow it to work efficiently on the PC plaques would be an ideal platform for a new treatment strategy in these patients.
Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Temperature and pressure are important factors during absorption of fluid from the peritoneal cavity, and the use of a relative low intraperitoneal pressure (2-6 mmHg) seems to increase the inflow of intraperitoneal fluid into the abdominal wall. Studies have confirmed that higher tissue concentrations of chemotherapy may be obtained by increasing the intraperitoneal pressure. After years of extensive testing, and the development of a micro-pump for safe aerosol infusion, a German research group has designed a system that allows a laparoscopy controlled, intraperitoneal aerosol infusion of chemotherapy (doxorubicin and cisplatin). The aerosol technique ensures that the entire peritoneal surface is covered by chemotherapy, and this is relevant in patients with PC. With the micro-pump positioned through a standard trocar pointing away from the bowels, a commercially available injection pump provides the necessary pressure to induce an aerosol mist covering the peritoneal cavity. After five minutes, the chemotherapy has been delivered, and the injector is turned off. After an additional 25 minutes of simple diffusion, the intra-abdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a standard trocar.
Recently, a German research group published their preliminary experience with PIPAC in gastric and ovarian cancer patients with PC .
PIPAC is not available freely on the market, and the procedure is not FDA approved yet. The German research team has emphasized, that despite the very encouraging results obtained so far, the efficacy and safety of PIPAC still has to be assessed in adequate clinical trials.
Aim In a compassionate use program, the aim of this study is to implement and evaluate the PIPAC procedure at Odense University Hospital under strict observation of both patient and occupational health safety aspects. Thus, it is important to emphasize, that the primary aim of this feasibility study is a quick and safe implementation of a new combined surgical-oncologic treatment technique which uses conventional chemotherapy in a new way in desperately ill cancer patients. For technical and safety reasons this implementation needs to be fulfilled and documented before patients can be enrolled in clinical trials.
Hypothesis The investigators expect the PIPAC procedure to be feasible and safe, with a primary non-access ratio of maximum 7:35 (mainly due to adhesions). The investigators expect a CTCAE grade of no more than 3 and that the procedure is safe for both patients, surgeons and OR staff.
Method
Study design This is a feasibility study where the PIPAC procedure will be performed in 35 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria.
Implementation of the PIPAC procedure In order to cover all safety aspects and to secure optimal treatment results, a complete manual and checklist for the entire PIPAC procedure, as well as for pre- and postoperative patient handling, has been made. Thus, every step of the procedure is carefully described and monitored, and prior to the first patient treatment, the entire PIPAC procedure will be tried in a "dummy" OR setup supervised by the German group. Although this group has documented, that the procedure is safe for both patients and health care workers, the procedure will only be performed in an OR with laminar airflow and a closed carbon dioxide (CO2) ventilation system. In addition, environmental measurements (platinum particles within the OR) and bio-monitoring (blood samples) of the OR team are scheduled from the beginning of the first PIPAC procedure.
Preliminary clinical evaluation 35 patients with PC (see inclusion criteria) will be scheduled for PIPAC. In collaboration with the German group, the local multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting will carefully select patients suitable for the PIPAC procedure. These patients are included according to national regulations and rules on experimental cancer research. All PIPAC procedures are performed with prophylactic antibiotics and start with a classification of the extent of the PC (Peritoneal Cancer Index, PCI) followed by selected quadrant biopsies to document malignancy and for later translational research. The type and doses of chemotherapy (1/10 of systemic dose), intra-abdominal pressure, temperature and delivery time are similar to those used by the German group. After the PIPAC procedure, the patients will be observed for two days before discharge. The treatment response is monitored by CT, and by a follow-up laparoscopy procedure with PCI score and biopsies after six weeks. The PIPAC procedure will be repeated during the same evaluation laparoscopy if objective response or no progression is observed. Adverse medical events will be graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 4.0), and surgical related complications according to the Dindo-Clavien classification.
Intra-abdominal access and completion of the PIPAC procedure in 28 of 35 patients and discharge of the same group within 2 POD are considered a successful implementation of the PIPAC procedure.
Occupational health safety aspects For safety reasons no staff is in the OR during the PIPAC procedure. The injector is controlled by a footswitch from outside the OR room, and observation monitors related to the anesthesiology are also made visible from outside the OR. Since no personnel are inside the ventilated OR room during application of the aerosolized chemotherapy, there are three barriers between surgeons/OR staff and the chemotherapy: The closed abdominal cavity, the laminar airflow system and the OR walls. The tightness of the abdominal cavity is controlled by allowing a maximum CO2 flow of 0.1-0.2 L/min corresponding to the body resorption of CO2. After the procedure, intraabdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a series of filters and into a closed system. Closure of the trocar sites, removal and disposal of dressings and syringes into special chemotherapy waste bins are performed by the surgeon alone. Environmental biomonitoring and blood samples from the surgeons and OR staff are scheduled as part of the safety monitoring.
Patient safety All patients are carefully selected (see exclusion criteria) on the MDT. The establishing of pneumoperitoneum and use of trocars are based on the highest standards for laparoscopic surgery which have a high safety profile. The procedures are performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons under the supervision of the German team. When following the safety protocol used by the German group, no mortality related to the PIPAC procedure has been observed. The risk of bowel perforation is 2 per mille, port site metastases occur in 0.6% of the procedures, and self- limiting erythema around the trocar site is found in 1.2% of the procedures (private communication, professor Marc A. Reymond).
A short period of postoperative fever and/or elevated acute phase proteins have been observed after the PIPAC procedure, but the majority of patients may be discharged the same or the following day, and the PIPAC procedure can be repeated several times.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| PIPAC | Experimental | Drug: PIPACPIPAC with cisplatin (7.5mg/m2 in 150 ml saline) and doxorubicin (1.5mg/m2 in 50 ml saline) in patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from any origin besides colorectal/appendiceal cancers in whom oxaliplatin (92mg/m2 in 150 ml dextrose) will be used. The aerosolised chemotherapy will be nebulized at a flow of 0.5ml/min at a maximum pressure of 200 PSI during a standard laparoscopy with an intraabdominal pressure of 12mmHg. The CO2 will be evacuated 30 minutes after administration of chemotherapy and the patient is closed similar to a standard laparoscopy. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Histological or cytological verified malignancy.
- Clinical or radiological evidence of peritoneal carcinomatosis.
- No indication for standard chemotherapy.
- Performance status 0-2 and life expectancy of more than 3 months.
- Age > 18 years.
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Symptomatic small bowel obstruction (Total parenteral nutrition, nasogastric tube).
- Previous treatment with maximum cumulative doses of doxorubicin, daunorubicin, epirubicin, idarubicin, and/or other anthracyclines and anthracenediones.
- A history of allergic reaction to cisplatin or other platinum containing compounds or doxorubicin.
- Renal impairment, defined as GFR < 50 ml/min, (Cockcroft-Gault Equation).
- Myocardial insufficiency, defined as NYHA class > 2.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| PIPACAlso: Cisplatin, Doxorubicin, Oxaliplatin | Drug | PIPAC |
Primary outcome
Number of Patients with Adverse Events.
Time frame: 5 months.
No patients with adverse events above grade 3 on the CTCAE (Version 4) scale. No patients with complications above grade 2 on the Dindo-Clavien classification.
2 secondary outcomes
Occupational health.
Time frame: 5 months.
Feasibility: Completion of procedure in 28:35
Time frame: 5 months.
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 12 Sep 2017.
- Background: PubMed 9548609Sugarbaker PH. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery for the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis and sarcomatosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1998 Apr-May;14(3):254-61. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2388(199804/05)14:33.0.co;2-u.
- Background: PubMed 24222942Coccolini F, Gheza F, Lotti M, Virzi S, Iusco D, Ghermandi C, Melotti R, Baiocchi G, Giulini SM, Ansaloni L, Catena F. Peritoneal carcinomatosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 7;19(41):6979-94. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.6979.
- Background: PubMed 15692055Flessner MF. The transport barrier in intraperitoneal therapy. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005 Mar;288(3):F433-42. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00313.2004.
- Background: PubMed 15273542Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae.
- Results publication: PubMed 8862729Jacquet P, Stuart OA, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Effects of intra-abdominal pressure on pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of doxorubicin after intraperitoneal administration. Anticancer Drugs. 1996 Jul;7(5):596-603. doi: 10.1097/00001813-199607000-00016.
- Results publication: PubMed 24275155Tempfer CB, Celik I, Solass W, Buerkle B, Pabst UG, Zieren J, Strumberg D, Reymond MA. Activity of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) with cisplatin and doxorubicin in women with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: preliminary clinical experience. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Feb;132(2):307-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.022. Epub 2013 Nov 23.
- Results publication: PubMed 24006094Solass W, Kerb R, Murdter T, Giger-Pabst U, Strumberg D, Tempfer C, Zieren J, Schwab M, Reymond MA. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy of peritoneal carcinomatosis using pressurized aerosol as an alternative to liquid solution: first evidence for efficacy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Feb;21(2):553-9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3213-1. Epub 2013 Sep 5.
- Results publication: PubMed 23377563Blanco A, Giger-Pabst U, Solass W, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Renal and hepatic toxicities after pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jul;20(7):2311-6. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2840-2. Epub 2013 Feb 3.
- Results publication: PubMed 23765417Solass W, Giger-Pabst U, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): occupational health and safety aspects. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Oct;20(11):3504-11. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3039-x. Epub 2013 Jun 14.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 30755498Graversen 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.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 29899763Graversen 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.
Related trials for Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
RecruitingPhase 1
Individual Response to Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy (HIPEC) Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis From Peritoneal Mesothelioma or Atypical Mesothelial Proliferation or From Ovarian, Colorectal, or Appendiceal Histologies
Peritoneal Mesothelioma, Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
RecruitingPhase 2
Combined Systemic and Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy for Synchronous Gastric and/or Gastroesophageal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
Synchronous Gastric Peritoneal Carcinomatosis, Gastroesophageal Peritoneal Carcinomatosis
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
Determining the Biodistribution of an Imaging Tracer (68Ga-FAPi-46) in Patients With Solid Tumors or Hematologic Cancers
Anal Carcinoma, Bladder Carcinoma
RecruitingPhase 1
A Study of Mesothelin-Targeted CAR T-Cell Therapy in People With Esophagogastric Cancer or Malignant Peritoneal Mesothelioma
Mesothelin Positive, Mesothelin-Expressing Tumors
Active, not recruitingPhase 1
Paclitaxel for the Treatment of Gastric or Gastroesophageal Cancer
Clinical Stage IV Gastric Cancer AJCC v8, Clinical Stage IV Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma AJCC v8
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.
Michael Mortensen, Professor study director
Odense University Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing PIPAC in people with Peritoneal Carcinomatosis, run by Michael Bau Mortensen at 1 site in Denmark.
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 6 inclusion and 9 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 12 Sep 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Denmark. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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 Adverse Events. (time frame: 5 months.). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02320448, which also lists 11 linked publications.
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 12 Sep 2017.