ToleranceEPICNCT04698694
ElectroPoration In a Clinical Setting
A study testing Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm) and Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm) in people with Tolerance, run by University of Milano Bicocca at 1 site in Italy.
Trial summary
This is a single-blind, single-center, randomized, study in healthy subjects in which the volunteer patients will remain blind with respect to the voltage strength received. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 months to 55 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Tolerance
- What is being tested?
- Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm) and Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm)
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteItaly
- Study dates
- 9 Dec 2020to 21 Dec 2020
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 months to 55 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Child, Adult
Who may be able to join
- Signed and dated informed consent obtained before undergoing any study-specific procedure
- Healthy subjects, as determined by a responsible physician, based on a medical evaluation including medical history and physical examination
- Males or females aged ≥18 and ≤ 55 years
- A minimum weight of 50 kg and Body Mass Index >18.5 and ≤30 kg/m2
- Vital signs within the following values or ranges:
- Body temperature ≤ 37,5 °C
Show all 13Show fewer
- Pulse frequency ≥51 and ≤100 beats per minute
- Diastolic BP ≥60 mmHg, ≤ 90 mmHg
- Systolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg, ≤ 140 mmHg
- Normal ECG
- CPK within normal reference range
- Non-pregnant women of childbearing potential, non-breastfeeding
- Able and willing to comply with all study procedures.
Who cannot join
- Any past or present cardiac disease, even if not evident at ECG
- Bleeding disorders (e.g. coagulopathy or platelet disorder or coagulation factor deficiency) or prior history of significant bleeding or bruising following IM injections or venepuncture
- History of seizures or mental illness
- Metal implants within 20 cm of the planned site(s) of injection
- Presence of keloid scar formation or hypertrophic scar, or other clinically significant medical condition at the planned site(s) of injection
- Any abnormality or permanent body art (e.g. tattoos) that would interfere with the ability to observe local reactions at the injection site in the deltoid area
Show all 10Show fewer
- History of alcohol or drug abuse during the 12 months preceding the screening
- Pregnancy (i.e. positive pregnancy test) or willingness/intention to become pregnant during the study
- Breastfeeding
- Any other clinically relevant disease and condition that, in the opinion of the Investigator, may jeopardize efficacy or safety assessments or may compromise the subject's safety during trial participation.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Tolerability of Intramuscular Electroporation Delivery by Cliniporator® in Healthy Volunteers
This is a single-blind, single-center, randomized, study in healthy subjects in which the volunteer patients will remain blind with respect to the voltage strength received.
Read the detailed description
Background:
The major obstacle to the preventive or therapeutic success of DNA vaccines is undoubtedly their delivery. If this cannot be made simple, cheap and effective, they may not become a viable option for human use. Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that a standard needle and syringe parenteral (mainly intramuscular or intradermal) delivery is not enough. An important tenet, confirmed by different DNA immunization studies, is that electroporation dramatically enhances the expression of the encoded antigen as well as the potency and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. Electroporation (EP) creates transient increases in cell membrane permeability, thus enhancing DNA uptake and leading to a more robust immune response. EP involves the application of brief electric pulses to tissue in order to permeabilize cell membranes in a transient and reversible manner. The temporary formation of pores facilitate successful transport of macromolecules, like DNA, that occurs on the order of microseconds vs. minutes in the case of passive diffusion alone. EP is considered a safe and well validated procedure that can easily be handled as an out-patient procedure. In this regard, electrochemotherapy and electro gene transfer with the Cliniporator® (IGEA Srl, Carpi, Italy) has been added to clinical practice.
Aim of the present study is therefore to formally confirm the tolerability of electroporation given by the EPSGT gun and the Cliniporator® device in a clinical setting of healthy volunteers, prior to the phase I/II study of the COVID-19 vaccine in a similar population.
Study Design:
Twenty (20) subjects will be randomized 1:1 to one of the following EP conditions:
- voltage amplitude of 40 V (10 subjects)
- voltage amplitude of 60 V (10 subjects). For the purpose of the study, 0.5 ml of sterile 0.9% saline solution will be injected intramuscularly into the deltoid muscle of the right arm using a common insulin syringe inserted in the EPS gun; the saline injection will immediately be followed by electroporation given by the gun connected to the electrical pulse generator, Cliniporator®.
The electroporation technology has been optimized by IGEA developing a dedicated EPS electrode gun. The EPS gun is an intuitive and handful procedure that combines in the same device the injection of a DNA vaccine (or a sterile 0.9% saline solution as in the case of the present study) and the delivery of the electrical pulses; the procedure is completed in few seconds. The EP needles 7 (diameter 0.45 mm) are hidden under a sliding cap integrated into the EPS gun, to reduce perceived pain potentially associated to anxiety or fear. The EPS gun allows the insertion of both the electrode needles and the syringe needle into the muscle. By pressing the syringe plunger, the content of the syringe will be injected, by pulling the trigger the syringe needle will be retracted, and finally the electrical pulses will be delivered by pressing a pedal connected to the pulse generator.
Pain assessment:
On the day of injection and EP, subjects will be instructed to measure the length of time pain is experienced by using a stopwatch. Additionally, subjects will complete the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to rate the level of pain experienced immediately (0 min) and after 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, and 60 min post-EP. In addition subjects will rate discomfort level using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), evaluated 60' (T4) after the procedure. On Day 2 and Day 7 post-EP, subjects will complete again the VAS as described above, and NRS. In addition, on Day 1 (T2, +15'), Day 2 and Day 7 subjects will complete a self-administered questionnaire assessing the acceptance of the procedure. Therefore, to better measure the acceptability of the injection related to the use of a new device from people's own perspectives, all participants will complete the Perception of Injection (PIN) questionnaire, adapted from the Vaccines' Perception of Injection (VAPI) questionnaire.
Safety Analysis:
Safety analyses will include summaries of the following:
- adverse events, including severity and relationship to the procedure (to the intramuscular injection, to the electroporation, or to both procedures)
- serious adverse events, including severity and relationship to the procedure (to the intramuscular injection or to the electroporation, or to both)
- abnormal changes in CPK
- abnormal changes in vital signs and ECG
Sample size and Statistical Analysis:
No sample size calculation was performed on this study on the tolerability of two EP voltage strengths.
The statistical analyses will be mainly descriptive. Qualitative variables will be summarized by counts and percentages, while quantitative characteristics by quartiles or mean and standard deviation, as appropriate.
Data collected longitudinally will be also described appropriately. Specific summary indices will be calculated on the longitudinal VAS profiles (e.g. SPID and peak PID) and the agreement between VAS and NRS collected at each time point will be also assessed.
All adverse events will be graded in accordance with the 2007 FDA toxicity grading scale for healthy adult and adolescent volunteers enrolled in preventive vaccine clinical trials (grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe, grade 4 = life-threatening) and will be reported as percentages and narratives will be also presented.
Study Management:
The data requested by the study will be reported in an electronic remote data capture system (e-CRF). The subject data collected in the e-CRF during the study will be documented anonymously and the subject can only be identified by an identification code.
- Conditions
- Tolerance
- Being tested
- Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm), Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm)
- Keywords
- coronavirus infection, vaccine, intramuscular electroporation
- Medical subject headings
- Coronavirus Infections
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm)Device
The physician will select the voltage amplitude of 40 V to be given to the subject based on a randomization list, while the subject will remain blind to the voltage he/she is assigned to. The electroporation will be performed with a EPS electrode gun.
Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm)Device
The physician will select the voltage amplitude of 60 V to be given to the subject based on a randomization list, while the subject will remain blind to the voltage he/she is assigned to. The electroporation will be performed with a EPS electrode gun.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 40 V | Experimental | 10 subjects deemed eligible are between 18-55 y of age respected the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be selected in a randomized way (1:1) and treated with a voltage amplitude of 40 V. Receives: Device: Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm) |
| Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 60 V | Experimental | 10 subjects deemed eligible are between 18-55 y of age respected the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be selected in a randomized way (1:1) and treated with a voltage amplitude of 60 V. Receives: Device: Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm) |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Pain of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Subjsects will rate the intramuscolar pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to rate the level of pain experienced from the minimum value of "No Pain" and the maximum value "Pain as bad as it could possibly be".
Measured: approximately 1 month
Discomfort level of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Subjsects will rate discomfort level using an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Scores range from the minimum value 0 that means ''None'' to 10 that means ''Severe''.
Measured: approximately 1 month
Pain of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Subjsects will rate the Perseption of Injection (PIN) questionnaire. Scores range from the minimum value 1 that means ''None'' to 5 that means ''very very much''.
Measured: approximately 1 month
Secondary outcomes (2)
Incidence of Injection site Adverse Events
Number of AE at the injection site
Measured: approximately 1 month
Incidence of sistemic Adverse Events
Number of sistemic AE
Measured: approximately 1 month
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Jan 2021
- Study start9 Dec 2020
- Primary completion14 Dec 2020
- Study completion21 Dec 2020
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (4)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for ToleranceStudies 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Twenty (20) subjects will be randomized 1:1 to one of the following EP conditions: 1. voltage amplitude of 40 V (10 subjects) 2. voltage amplitude of 60 V (10 subjects).
- Masking
- Double blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Investigator
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Milano Bicocca
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Rottapharm
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04698694
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EPIC trial
- Acronym
- EPIC
- Status last verified
- Apr 2021
- First submitted
- 14 Dec 2020
- Last updated
- 21 Apr 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Frelin L, Brass A, Ahlen G, Brenndorfer ED, Chen M, Sallberg M. Electroporation: a promising method for the nonviral delivery of DNA vaccines in humans? Drug News Perspect. 2010 Dec;23(10):647-53. doi: 10.1358/dnp.2010.23.10.1513492.
PubMed 21180650Mir LM. Application of electroporation gene therapy: past, current, and future. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;423:3-17. doi: 10.1007/978-1-59745-194-9_1.
PubMed 18370187Paul-Dauphin A, Guillemin F, Virion JM, Briancon S. Bias and precision in visual analogue scales: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Nov 15;150(10):1117-27. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009937.
PubMed 10568628Rizzuto G, Cappelletti M, Maione D, Savino R, Lazzaro D, Costa P, Mathiesen I, Cortese R, Ciliberto G, Laufer R, La Monica N, Fattori E. Efficient and regulated erythropoietin production by naked DNA injection and muscle electroporation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 May 25;96(11):6417-22. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.11.6417.
PubMed 10339602
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 21 Apr 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Tolerability of Intramuscular Electroporation Delivery by Cliniporator® in Healthy Volunteers
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04698694
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EPIC / EPIC trial
- Conditions
- Tolerance
- Keywords
- coronavirus infection, vaccine, intramuscular electroporation
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Milano BicoccaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Rottapharm
- Study start
- 9 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 14 Dec 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 21 Dec 2020 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Jan 2021 (actual)
- 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 single-blind, single-center, randomized, study in healthy subjects in which the volunteer patients will remain blind with respect to the voltage strength received.
Detailed description
Background:
The major obstacle to the preventive or therapeutic success of DNA vaccines is undoubtedly their delivery. If this cannot be made simple, cheap and effective, they may not become a viable option for human use. Numerous clinical trials have confirmed that a standard needle and syringe parenteral (mainly intramuscular or intradermal) delivery is not enough. An important tenet, confirmed by different DNA immunization studies, is that electroporation dramatically enhances the expression of the encoded antigen as well as the potency and immunogenicity of DNA vaccines. Electroporation (EP) creates transient increases in cell membrane permeability, thus enhancing DNA uptake and leading to a more robust immune response. EP involves the application of brief electric pulses to tissue in order to permeabilize cell membranes in a transient and reversible manner. The temporary formation of pores facilitate successful transport of macromolecules, like DNA, that occurs on the order of microseconds vs. minutes in the case of passive diffusion alone. EP is considered a safe and well validated procedure that can easily be handled as an out-patient procedure. In this regard, electrochemotherapy and electro gene transfer with the Cliniporator® (IGEA Srl, Carpi, Italy) has been added to clinical practice.
Aim of the present study is therefore to formally confirm the tolerability of electroporation given by the EPSGT gun and the Cliniporator® device in a clinical setting of healthy volunteers, prior to the phase I/II study of the COVID-19 vaccine in a similar population.
Study Design:
Twenty (20) subjects will be randomized 1:1 to one of the following EP conditions:
- voltage amplitude of 40 V (10 subjects)
- voltage amplitude of 60 V (10 subjects). For the purpose of the study, 0.5 ml of sterile 0.9% saline solution will be injected intramuscularly into the deltoid muscle of the right arm using a common insulin syringe inserted in the EPS gun; the saline injection will immediately be followed by electroporation given by the gun connected to the electrical pulse generator, Cliniporator®.
The electroporation technology has been optimized by IGEA developing a dedicated EPS electrode gun. The EPS gun is an intuitive and handful procedure that combines in the same device the injection of a DNA vaccine (or a sterile 0.9% saline solution as in the case of the present study) and the delivery of the electrical pulses; the procedure is completed in few seconds. The EP needles 7 (diameter 0.45 mm) are hidden under a sliding cap integrated into the EPS gun, to reduce perceived pain potentially associated to anxiety or fear. The EPS gun allows the insertion of both the electrode needles and the syringe needle into the muscle. By pressing the syringe plunger, the content of the syringe will be injected, by pulling the trigger the syringe needle will be retracted, and finally the electrical pulses will be delivered by pressing a pedal connected to the pulse generator.
Pain assessment:
On the day of injection and EP, subjects will be instructed to measure the length of time pain is experienced by using a stopwatch. Additionally, subjects will complete the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to rate the level of pain experienced immediately (0 min) and after 5 min, 15 min, 30 min, and 60 min post-EP. In addition subjects will rate discomfort level using an 11-point numerical rating scale (NRS), evaluated 60' (T4) after the procedure. On Day 2 and Day 7 post-EP, subjects will complete again the VAS as described above, and NRS. In addition, on Day 1 (T2, +15'), Day 2 and Day 7 subjects will complete a self-administered questionnaire assessing the acceptance of the procedure. Therefore, to better measure the acceptability of the injection related to the use of a new device from people's own perspectives, all participants will complete the Perception of Injection (PIN) questionnaire, adapted from the Vaccines' Perception of Injection (VAPI) questionnaire.
Safety Analysis:
Safety analyses will include summaries of the following:
- adverse events, including severity and relationship to the procedure (to the intramuscular injection, to the electroporation, or to both procedures)
- serious adverse events, including severity and relationship to the procedure (to the intramuscular injection or to the electroporation, or to both)
- abnormal changes in CPK
- abnormal changes in vital signs and ECG
Sample size and Statistical Analysis:
No sample size calculation was performed on this study on the tolerability of two EP voltage strengths.
The statistical analyses will be mainly descriptive. Qualitative variables will be summarized by counts and percentages, while quantitative characteristics by quartiles or mean and standard deviation, as appropriate.
Data collected longitudinally will be also described appropriately. Specific summary indices will be calculated on the longitudinal VAS profiles (e.g. SPID and peak PID) and the agreement between VAS and NRS collected at each time point will be also assessed.
All adverse events will be graded in accordance with the 2007 FDA toxicity grading scale for healthy adult and adolescent volunteers enrolled in preventive vaccine clinical trials (grade 1 = mild, grade 2 = moderate, grade 3 = severe, grade 4 = life-threatening) and will be reported as percentages and narratives will be also presented.
Study Management:
The data requested by the study will be reported in an electronic remote data capture system (e-CRF). The subject data collected in the e-CRF during the study will be documented anonymously and the subject can only be identified by an identification code.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Double blind (participant, investigator)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Twenty (20) subjects will be randomized 1:1 to one of the following EP conditions: 1. voltage amplitude of 40 V (10 subjects) 2. voltage amplitude of 60 V (10 subjects).
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 40 V | Experimental | Device: Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm)10 subjects deemed eligible are between 18-55 y of age respected the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be selected in a randomized way (1:1) and treated with a voltage amplitude of 40 V. |
| Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 60 V | Experimental | Device: Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm)10 subjects deemed eligible are between 18-55 y of age respected the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be selected in a randomized way (1:1) and treated with a voltage amplitude of 60 V. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 months to 55 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult
Key inclusion criteria (13 listed)
- Signed and dated informed consent obtained before undergoing any study-specific procedure
- Healthy subjects, as determined by a responsible physician, based on a medical evaluation including medical history and physical examination
- Males or females aged ≥18 and ≤ 55 years
- A minimum weight of 50 kg and Body Mass Index >18.5 and ≤30 kg/m2
- Vital signs within the following values or ranges:
Key exclusion criteria (10 listed)
- Any past or present cardiac disease, even if not evident at ECG
- Bleeding disorders (e.g. coagulopathy or platelet disorder or coagulation factor deficiency) or prior history of significant bleeding or bruising following IM injections or venepuncture
- History of seizures or mental illness
- Metal implants within 20 cm of the planned site(s) of injection
- Presence of keloid scar formation or hypertrophic scar, or other clinically significant medical condition at the planned site(s) of injection
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm)The physician will select the voltage amplitude of 40 V to be given to the subject based on a randomization list, while the subject will remain blind to the voltage he/she is assigned to. The electroporation will be performed with a EPS electrode gun. | Device | Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 40 V |
| Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm)The physician will select the voltage amplitude of 60 V to be given to the subject based on a randomization list, while the subject will remain blind to the voltage he/she is assigned to. The electroporation will be performed with a EPS electrode gun. | Device | Subjects treated with Cliniporator® using a voltage amplitude of 60 V |
Primary outcome
Pain of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Time frame: approximately 1 month
Subjsects will rate the intramuscolar pain using the Visual Analog Scale (VAS) to rate the level of pain experienced from the minimum value of "No Pain" and the maximum value "Pain as bad as it could possibly be".
Discomfort level of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Time frame: approximately 1 month
Subjsects will rate discomfort level using an 11-point Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). Scores range from the minimum value 0 that means ''None'' to 10 that means ''Severe''.
Pain of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation
Time frame: approximately 1 month
Subjsects will rate the Perseption of Injection (PIN) questionnaire. Scores range from the minimum value 1 that means ''None'' to 5 that means ''very very much''.
2 secondary outcomes
Incidence of Injection site Adverse Events
Time frame: approximately 1 month
Incidence of sistemic Adverse Events
Time frame: approximately 1 month
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 21 Apr 2021.
- Background: PubMed 21180650Frelin L, Brass A, Ahlen G, Brenndorfer ED, Chen M, Sallberg M. Electroporation: a promising method for the nonviral delivery of DNA vaccines in humans? Drug News Perspect. 2010 Dec;23(10):647-53. doi: 10.1358/dnp.2010.23.10.1513492.
- Background: PubMed 18370187Mir LM. Application of electroporation gene therapy: past, current, and future. Methods Mol Biol. 2008;423:3-17. doi: 10.1007/978-1-59745-194-9_1.
- Background: PubMed 10568628Paul-Dauphin A, Guillemin F, Virion JM, Briancon S. Bias and precision in visual analogue scales: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Epidemiol. 1999 Nov 15;150(10):1117-27. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a009937.
- Background: PubMed 10339602Rizzuto G, Cappelletti M, Maione D, Savino R, Lazzaro D, Costa P, Mathiesen I, Cortese R, Ciliberto G, Laufer R, La Monica N, Fattori E. Efficient and regulated erythropoietin production by naked DNA injection and muscle electroporation. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1999 May 25;96(11):6417-22. doi: 10.1073/pnas.96.11.6417.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Tolerance
Recruiting
Evaluation of the Tolerance of a New Formula Based on Hydrolyzed Rice Proteins in Children With Cow's Milk Allergy
IgE-Mediated Cow Milk Allergy
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
A Phase 1b / 2 Drug Resistant Immunotherapy With Activated, Gene Modified Allogeneic or Autologous γδ T Cells (DeltEx) in Combination With Maintenance Temozolomide in Subjects With Recurrent or Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma
Glioblastoma
Recruiting
Combinaison of Virtual Reality and Rehabilitation to Improve Muscle Function, Exercise Tolerance, Exertional Symptoms and Dyspnea in Patients With Chronic Respiratory Disease: a Randomized Cross-over Trial
Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease
RecruitingPhase 1
IKS03 in Patients With Advanced B Cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphomas
B-cell Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, Diffuse Large B Cell Lymphoma
RecruitingPhase 3
The CDK4/6 Inhibitor Dosing Knowledge (CDK) Study
Metastatic Breast Cancer
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 40 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 100 V/cm) and Electroporation with voltage amplitude of 60 V (corresponding to an electric field strength of 150 V/cm) in people with Tolerance, run by University of Milano Bicocca at 1 site in Italy.
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 13 inclusion and 10 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 21 Apr 2021. 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 Italy. 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.
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?
Pain of intramuscular delivery of a sterile solution followed by electroporation (time frame: approximately 1 month). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT04698694, which also lists 4 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 21 Apr 2021.