Gastric CancerNCT05181306
Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer
An observational study of Gastric Cancer, run by Southwest Hospital, China at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
This study is a retrospective, single-center, controlled and observation trial comparing robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymph nodal dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer patients with laparoscopic procedure. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Gastric Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy and Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- How many people
- 430 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2010to 30 Jul 2016
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 to 80 years
- All sexes
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer who need to received total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy.
Who may be able to join
- 1.Pathologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma; 2.Age: older than 18 years old, younger than 80 years old; 3.Tumor located in the upper third of the stomach or esophagogastric junction or other location, and is possible to be curatively resected by total gastrectomy; 4.Preoperative stage of cT2-4aN0-3M0 according to American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control 8th edition; 5.American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score of class I to III; 6.Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; 7.Patients who freely give informed consent to participate in the clinical study;
Who cannot join
- 1.Early gastric cancer; 2.Age: younger than 18 years old, older than 80 years old; 3.Total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was not required; 4.Enlarged or bulky regional lymph node diameter larger than 3 cm based on preoperative imaging; 5.Emergency surgery for gastric cancer-related complications (bleeding or complete obstruction or perforation); 6.Previous upper abdominal surgery (except laparoscopic cholecystectomy); 7.Previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy for gastric cancer; 8.Unstable angina or myocardial infarction within the past 6 months; 9.Cerebrovascular accident within the past 6 months; 10.American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score of class more than III; 11.Severe respiratory disease (FEV1< 50%); 12.Continuous systemic steroid therapy within 1 month before the study; 13.Pregnant or breast-feeding women;
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Study
This study is a retrospective, single-center, controlled and observation trial comparing robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymph nodal dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer patients with laparoscopic procedure.
Read the detailed description
Since Kitano firstly reported laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy in 1994, the number of patients undergoing the laparoscopic procedure has gradually increased. The latest Japanese gastric cancer treatment guideline recommends laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) as an optional treatment for cStage（clinical stage） Ⅰ gastric cancer (GC).
Based on the experience of early GC, most experienced surgeons have applied the laparoscopic procedure in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) especially in east world like China, Japan and Korea. Though applying laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is much more difficulty than that of distal gastrectomy (DG), there are a mount of centers reported their experiences of this procedure. A meta-analysis including seventeen studies of 2313 patients (955 in LTG and 1358 in open total gastrectomy) demonstrated that LTG can have less blood loss, fewer analgesic uses, earlier passage of flatus, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier hospital discharge, and reduced postoperative morbidity. However, the number of harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, hospital mortality, 5-year OS(overall survival) and DFS(disease-free survival) were similar in both groups. According to the existing reports, LTG is technically safety and feasibility.
To overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, robot systems have been introduced to treat GC providing technical advantages since Hashizume firstly reported. Yoon and Son respectively compared robot total gastrectomy (RTG) with LTG, they drew a common conclusion that the number of dissected lymph nodes and postoperative complications were similar in both groups. But Son found that the mean numbers of retrieved lymph nodes along the splenic artery from RTG was higher than LTG (2.3 vs. 1.0, p = 0.013), as was also the case at the splenic hilum and artery (3.6 vs.1.9, p = 0.014). Regretfully, most of their reported cases were early gastric cancer (EGC). Other literatures reported AGC patients under RTG or LTG together with distal gastrectomy (DG), the investigators haven't found any literature compare RTG with LTG alone for AGC retrospectively.
Since most literatures are EGC patients and retrospectively researches, the investigators can't insist that patients with AGC may benefit under RTG. Therefore, the investigators launch this retrospective, single-center, controlled observation trial comparing RTG for locally advanced gastric cancer patients with LTG. In the process of research, it will be divided into two groups according to the willing of patients or their legal representatives who choose one of the two procedures(RTG or LTG) to cure GC.
- Conditions
- Gastric Cancer
- Being tested
- Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy, Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy
- Keywords
- Advanced gastric cancer, Total gastrectomy, Robotic, Laparoscopic, Long-term outcomes
- Medical subject headings
- Stomach Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 LymphadenectomyProcedure or surgery
Robotic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection will be performed with curative treated intent according to the patients' or their legal representatives'willing to choose robotic-assisted total gastrectomy and excluding T4b、bulky lymph nodes or distant metastasis case by diagnostic laparoscopy. The alimentary canal reconstruction method is selected as esophageal jejunal R-Y anastomosis. Whether to reinforce the anastomotic manually is decided by the surgeon's experience. The reconstruction can be carried out by extracorporeal or intracorporeal anastomosis.
Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 LymphadenectomyProcedure or surgery
Laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection will be performed with curative treated intent according to the patients' or their legal representatives'willing to choose laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy and excluding T4b、bulky lymph nodes or distant metastasis case by diagnostic laparoscopy. The alimentary canal reconstruction method is selected as esophageal jejunal R-Y anastomosis. Whether to reinforce the anastomotic manually is decided by the surgeon's experience. The reconstruction can be carried out by extracorporeal or intracorporeal anastomosis.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Robotic surgery | Not described Receives: Procedure: Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy | |
| Laparoscopic surgery | Not described Receives: Procedure: Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
5-year Overall survival rate
5-year Overall survival rate
Measured: 5 years
5-year Disease-free survival rate
5-year Disease-free survival rate
Measured: 5 years
Recurrence
Recurrence
Measured: 5 years
Secondary outcomes (11)
Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality
Refers to the incidence of early postoperative complications. The early postoperative complication are defined as the event observed within 30 days after surgery.
Measured: 30 days
Time of operation
The total time of operation
Measured: 1 day
Estimated blood loss
Blood loss during intraoperative including the volume of negative pressure drainage bottle and the increasing weight of gauzes （ml）
Measured: 1 day
Blood transfusion
Blood transfusion during operation
Measured: 1 day
Length of proximal and distal cutting margin
Length of proximal and distal cutting margin of the specimen
Measured: 1 day
Number of retrieved overall lymph nodes, N1 lymph nodes, N2 lymph nodes and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes
Number of retrieved overall lymph nodes, N1 lymph nodes, N2 lymph nodes and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes
Measured: 7 days
Time to flatus
Time of anus exsufflation
Measured: 30 days
Time to liquid diet
Time to liquid diet
Measured: 30 days
Time to soft diet
Time to soft diet
Measured: 30 days
Duration of postoperative hospital stay
Duration of postoperative hospital stay
Measured: 30 days
Cost
All costs of hospitalization
Measured: 30 days
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Jan 2022
- Study start1 Oct 2010
- Primary completion30 Jul 2016
- Study completion30 Jul 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (8)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Gastric 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 430 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Southwest Hospital, China
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Yan Shi, Southwest Hospital, China
- Investigators
- Pei-wu Yu, Study chair, Department of General Surgery and Center of Microinvasive Gastrointestinal Surgery,Southwest Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05181306
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- KY2021123
- Status last verified
- Dec 2021
- First submitted
- 6 Dec 2021
- Last updated
- 6 Jan 2022
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017 Jan;20(1):1-19. doi: 10.1007/s10120-016-0622-4. Epub 2016 Jun 24. No abstract available.
PubMed 27342689Etoh T, Honda M, Kumamaru H, Miyata H, Yoshida K, Kodera Y, Kakeji Y, Inomata M, Konno H, Seto Y, Kitano S, Hiki N. Morbidity and mortality from a propensity score-matched, prospective cohort study of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: data from a nationwide web-based database. Surg Endosc. 2018 Jun;32(6):2766-2773. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5976-0. Epub 2017 Dec 7.
PubMed 29218676Yoon HM, Kim YW, Lee JH, Ryu KW, Eom BW, Park JY, Choi IJ, Kim CG, Lee JY, Cho SJ, Rho JY. Robot-assisted total gastrectomy is comparable with laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. 2012 May;26(5):1377-81. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-2043-0. Epub 2011 Nov 16.
PubMed 22083338Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic procedure. Surg Endosc. 2014 Sep;28(9):2606-15. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3511-0. Epub 2014 Apr 3.
PubMed 24695982Shen W, Xi H, Wei B, Cui J, Bian S, Zhang K, Wang N, Huang X, Chen L. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of short-term surgical outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2016 Feb;30(2):574-580. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4241-7. Epub 2015 Jul 25.
PubMed 26208497Pan HF, Wang G, Liu J, Liu XX, Zhao K, Tang XF, Jiang ZW. Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017 Dec;27(6):428-433. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000469.
PubMed 29211699Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, Yingxue H, Dongzhu Z, Yongliang Z, Feng Q, Peiwu Y. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014 Jun;28(6):1779-87. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3385-6. Epub 2014 Jan 3.
PubMed 24385251Wang W, Zhang X, Shen C, Zhi X, Wang B, Xu Z. Laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 18;9(2):e88753. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088753. eCollection 2014.
PubMed 24558421
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Jan 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Long-term Oncologic Outcomes of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Total Gastrectomy for Advanced Gastric Cancer: A Propensity Score Matching Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05181306
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- KY2021123
- Conditions
- Gastric Cancer
- Keywords
- Advanced gastric cancer, Total gastrectomy, Robotic, Laparoscopic, Long-term outcomes
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 430 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Southwest Hospital, ChinaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2010 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jul 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jul 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Jan 2022 (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 study is a retrospective, single-center, controlled and observation trial comparing robotic total gastrectomy with D2 lymph nodal dissection for locally advanced gastric cancer patients with laparoscopic procedure.
Detailed description
Since Kitano firstly reported laparoscopy-assisted distal gastrectomy in 1994, the number of patients undergoing the laparoscopic procedure has gradually increased. The latest Japanese gastric cancer treatment guideline recommends laparoscopic gastrectomy (LG) as an optional treatment for cStage（clinical stage） Ⅰ gastric cancer (GC).
Based on the experience of early GC, most experienced surgeons have applied the laparoscopic procedure in patients with locally advanced gastric cancer (AGC) especially in east world like China, Japan and Korea. Though applying laparoscopic total gastrectomy (LTG) is much more difficulty than that of distal gastrectomy (DG), there are a mount of centers reported their experiences of this procedure. A meta-analysis including seventeen studies of 2313 patients (955 in LTG and 1358 in open total gastrectomy) demonstrated that LTG can have less blood loss, fewer analgesic uses, earlier passage of flatus, quicker resumption of oral intake, earlier hospital discharge, and reduced postoperative morbidity. However, the number of harvested lymph nodes, proximal resection margin, hospital mortality, 5-year OS(overall survival) and DFS(disease-free survival) were similar in both groups. According to the existing reports, LTG is technically safety and feasibility.
To overcome the limitations of laparoscopic surgery, robot systems have been introduced to treat GC providing technical advantages since Hashizume firstly reported. Yoon and Son respectively compared robot total gastrectomy (RTG) with LTG, they drew a common conclusion that the number of dissected lymph nodes and postoperative complications were similar in both groups. But Son found that the mean numbers of retrieved lymph nodes along the splenic artery from RTG was higher than LTG (2.3 vs. 1.0, p = 0.013), as was also the case at the splenic hilum and artery (3.6 vs.1.9, p = 0.014). Regretfully, most of their reported cases were early gastric cancer (EGC). Other literatures reported AGC patients under RTG or LTG together with distal gastrectomy (DG), the investigators haven't found any literature compare RTG with LTG alone for AGC retrospectively.
Since most literatures are EGC patients and retrospectively researches, the investigators can't insist that patients with AGC may benefit under RTG. Therefore, the investigators launch this retrospective, single-center, controlled observation trial comparing RTG for locally advanced gastric cancer patients with LTG. In the process of research, it will be divided into two groups according to the willing of patients or their legal representatives who choose one of the two procedures(RTG or LTG) to cure GC.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Robotic surgery | – | Procedure: Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy |
| Laparoscopic surgery | – | Procedure: Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 Lymphadenectomy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients diagnosed with gastric cancer who need to received total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- 1.Pathologically proven gastric adenocarcinoma; 2.Age: older than 18 years old, younger than 80 years old; 3.Tumor located in the upper third of the stomach or esophagogastric junction or other location, and is possible to be curatively resected by total gastrectomy; 4.Preoperative stage of cT2-4aN0-3M0 according to American Joint Committee on Cancer/Union for International Cancer Control 8th edition; 5.American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score of class I to III; 6.Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1; 7.Patients who freely give informed consent to participate in the clinical study;
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- 1.Early gastric cancer; 2.Age: younger than 18 years old, older than 80 years old; 3.Total gastrectomy with D2 lymphadenectomy was not required; 4.Enlarged or bulky regional lymph node diameter larger than 3 cm based on preoperative imaging; 5.Emergency surgery for gastric cancer-related complications (bleeding or complete obstruction or perforation); 6.Previous upper abdominal surgery (except laparoscopic cholecystectomy); 7.Previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy for gastric cancer; 8.Unstable angina or myocardial infarction within the past 6 months; 9.Cerebrovascular accident within the past 6 months; 10.American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score of class more than III; 11.Severe respiratory disease (FEV1< 50%); 12.Continuous systemic steroid therapy within 1 month before the study; 13.Pregnant or breast-feeding women;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Robotic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 LymphadenectomyRobotic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection will be performed with curative treated intent according to the patients' or their legal representatives'willing to choose robotic-assisted total gastrectomy and excluding T4b、bulky lymph nodes or distant metastasis case by diagnostic laparoscopy. The alimentary canal reconstruction method is selected as esophageal jejunal R-Y anastomosis. Whether to reinforce the anastomotic manually is decided by the surgeon's experience. The reconstruction can be carried out by extracorporeal or intracorporeal anastomosis. | Procedure or surgery | Robotic surgery |
| Laparoscopic-assisted Total Gastrectomy with D2 LymphadenectomyLaparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy with D2 lymph node dissection will be performed with curative treated intent according to the patients' or their legal representatives'willing to choose laparoscopic-assisted total gastrectomy and excluding T4b、bulky lymph nodes or distant metastasis case by diagnostic laparoscopy. The alimentary canal reconstruction method is selected as esophageal jejunal R-Y anastomosis. Whether to reinforce the anastomotic manually is decided by the surgeon's experience. The reconstruction can be carried out by extracorporeal or intracorporeal anastomosis. | Procedure or surgery | Laparoscopic surgery |
Primary outcome
5-year Overall survival rate
Time frame: 5 years
5-year Overall survival rate
5-year Disease-free survival rate
Time frame: 5 years
5-year Disease-free survival rate
Recurrence
Time frame: 5 years
Recurrence
11 secondary outcomes
Overall postoperative morbidity and mortality
Time frame: 30 days
Time of operation
Time frame: 1 day
Estimated blood loss
Time frame: 1 day
Blood transfusion
Time frame: 1 day
Length of proximal and distal cutting margin
Time frame: 1 day
Number of retrieved overall lymph nodes, N1 lymph nodes, N2 lymph nodes and supra-pancreatic lymph nodes
Time frame: 7 days
Time to flatus
Time frame: 30 days
Time to liquid diet
Time frame: 30 days
Time to soft diet
Time frame: 30 days
Duration of postoperative hospital stay
Time frame: 30 days
Cost
Time frame: 30 days
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 6 Jan 2022.
- Background: PubMed 27342689Japanese Gastric Cancer Association. Japanese gastric cancer treatment guidelines 2014 (ver. 4). Gastric Cancer. 2017 Jan;20(1):1-19. doi: 10.1007/s10120-016-0622-4. Epub 2016 Jun 24. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 29218676Etoh T, Honda M, Kumamaru H, Miyata H, Yoshida K, Kodera Y, Kakeji Y, Inomata M, Konno H, Seto Y, Kitano S, Hiki N. Morbidity and mortality from a propensity score-matched, prospective cohort study of laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: data from a nationwide web-based database. Surg Endosc. 2018 Jun;32(6):2766-2773. doi: 10.1007/s00464-017-5976-0. Epub 2017 Dec 7.
- Background: PubMed 22083338Yoon HM, Kim YW, Lee JH, Ryu KW, Eom BW, Park JY, Choi IJ, Kim CG, Lee JY, Cho SJ, Rho JY. Robot-assisted total gastrectomy is comparable with laparoscopically assisted total gastrectomy for early gastric cancer. Surg Endosc. 2012 May;26(5):1377-81. doi: 10.1007/s00464-011-2043-0. Epub 2011 Nov 16.
- Background: PubMed 24695982Son T, Lee JH, Kim YM, Kim HI, Noh SH, Hyung WJ. Robotic spleen-preserving total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison with conventional laparoscopic procedure. Surg Endosc. 2014 Sep;28(9):2606-15. doi: 10.1007/s00464-014-3511-0. Epub 2014 Apr 3.
- Background: PubMed 26208497Shen W, Xi H, Wei B, Cui J, Bian S, Zhang K, Wang N, Huang X, Chen L. Robotic versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of short-term surgical outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2016 Feb;30(2):574-580. doi: 10.1007/s00464-015-4241-7. Epub 2015 Jul 25.
- Background: PubMed 29211699Pan HF, Wang G, Liu J, Liu XX, Zhao K, Tang XF, Jiang ZW. Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Gastrectomy for Locally Advanced Gastric Cancer. Surg Laparosc Endosc Percutan Tech. 2017 Dec;27(6):428-433. doi: 10.1097/SLE.0000000000000469.
- Background: PubMed 24385251Junfeng Z, Yan S, Bo T, Yingxue H, Dongzhu Z, Yongliang Z, Feng Q, Peiwu Y. Robotic gastrectomy versus laparoscopic gastrectomy for gastric cancer: comparison of surgical performance and short-term outcomes. Surg Endosc. 2014 Jun;28(6):1779-87. doi: 10.1007/s00464-013-3385-6. Epub 2014 Jan 3.
- Background: PubMed 24558421Wang W, Zhang X, Shen C, Zhi X, Wang B, Xu Z. Laparoscopic versus open total gastrectomy for gastric cancer: an updated meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2014 Feb 18;9(2):e88753. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0088753. eCollection 2014.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Gastric Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Study of INBRX-106 and INBRX-106 in Combination With Pembrolizumab (Keytruda®) in Subjects With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Solid Tumors (Hexavalent OX40 Agonist)
Solid Tumor, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Multicenter Validation Trial of [18F]AlF-FAPI-74 for PET Imaging of Cancer-associated Fibroblasts Through Fibroblast Activation Protein Inhibitors (FAPI) in Different Tumor Types
Oesophageal Cancer, Gastric Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
GK01 Cell Therapy in Gastric Cancer With Peritoneal Metastasis
Gastric Cancer (GC)
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Neoadjuvant-adjuvant Durvalumab and FLOT Chemotherapy Followed by Adjuvant Durvalumab in Chinese Patients With Resectable GC/GEJC.
Gastric, Esophagogastric Junction
Active, not recruitingEarly Phase 1
Iomab-ACT: A Pilot Study of 131-I Apamistamab Followed by CD19-Targeted CAR T-Cell Therapy for Patients With Relapsed or Refractory B-Cell Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia or Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma
B-ALL, DLBCL
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.
Pei-wu Yu study chair
Department of General Surgery and Center of Microinvasive Gastrointestinal Surgery,Southwest Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Gastric Cancer, run by Southwest Hospital, China at 1 site in China.
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 1 inclusion and 1 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 6 Jan 2022. 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 China. 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?
5-year Overall survival rate (time frame: 5 years). 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 NCT05181306, which also lists 8 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 6 Jan 2022.