Prostate CancerERUPNCT05326282
Evaluating the Role of Ultrasound in Prostate Cancer
A study testing Multi-parametric ultrasound in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
Active surveillance (AS) is becoming an increasingly common treatment option for men who have been diagnosed with localised low-grade prostate cancer (PCa). Low-grade disease is commonly noted by clinicians to be clinically insignificant cancer but remains a psychological burden to many men in this cohort. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, men onlyHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Prostate Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Multi-parametric ultrasound
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 6 Dec 2021to 27 Feb 2024
- 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 years and older
- Men only
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- he recruitment criteria and pathway for the clinical phases of the study are outlined in the flow charts, appendix 1 and appendix 2. These identify when the participants will be invited to participate, when consent will be obtained and the broad outline of the involvement in the study that participants can expect.
- Men referred to urology within Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust with suspected, but undiagnosed, prostate cancer and:
- Age equal to 75 or less
- PSA equal to 20 or less
- Life expectancy of 10 years or more
- Multi-parametric MRI performed as part of routine care pathway
Show all 37Show fewer
- Are able to tolerate a rectal ultrasound examination
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
- Men referred to urology within Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust with known localised prostate cancer of Gleason 3 + 3 (6) or less and:
- Are eligible for an AS monitoring pathway
- Are on an AS monitoring pathway which is regularly reviewed by a consultant urologist
- Able to attend Castle Hill Hospital for 6 monthly multi-parametric US examinations
- Are able to tolerate a rectal ultrasound examination
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
- Health care practitioner working as a radiologist or sonographer and employed within radiology of Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
- Hold a recognised qualification awarded by the Royal College of Radiologists or a recognised post graduate ultrasound qualification undertaken at a consortium for accreditation of sonographic education (CASE) approved higher education institute
- Registered with a statutory regulator such as the General Medical Council (GMC), Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC), Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC)
- Participates in the current radiology prostate cancer assessment care pathway
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
- Men referred to urology within Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust with suspected, but undiagnosed, prostate cancer and:
- Age equal to 75 or less
- PSA equal to 20 or less
- Life expectancy of 10 years or more
- Multi-parametric MRI performed as part of routine care pathway
- Are able to tolerate a rectal ultrasound examination
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
- Men referred to urology within Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust with known localised prostate cancer of Gleason 3 + 3 (6) or less and:
- Are eligible for an AS monitoring pathway
- Are on an AS monitoring pathway which is regularly reviewed by a consultant urologist
- Able to attend Castle Hill Hospital for 6 monthly multi-parametric US examinations
- Are able to tolerate a rectal ultrasound examination
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
- Health care practitioner working as a radiologist or sonographer and employed within radiology of Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
- Hold a recognised qualification awarded by the Royal College of Radiologists or a recognised post graduate ultrasound qualification undertaken at a CASE approved higher education institute
- Registered with a statutory regulator such as the GMC, NMC or HCPC
- Participates in the current radiology prostate cancer assessment care pathway
- Able to provide informed consent to the study
Who cannot join
- the recruitment criteria and pathway for the clinical phases of the study are outlined in the flow charts, appendix 1 and appendix 2. These identify when the participants will be invited to participate, when consent will be obtained and the broad outline of the involvement in the study that participants can expect.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site
Ultrasound, Radiology
Hull, East Yorkshire, HU16 5JZ
About this study
Official title: A Proof of Concept Study Evaluating the Role of Emerging Ultrasound Technologies in the Assessment and Monitoring of Localised Prostate Cancer in Men on an Active Surveillance Programme
Active surveillance (AS) is becoming an increasingly common treatment option for men who have been diagnosed with localised low-grade prostate cancer (PCa). Low-grade disease is commonly noted by clinicians to be clinically insignificant cancer but remains a psychological burden to many men in this cohort. There is consensus that regular review is required for men on AS so that early treatment can be undertaken if there is disease progression, and to support men living with a cancer diagnosis. Some AS protocols, including National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), advocate the use of MRI as a regular part of the monitoring pathway.
Unfortunately, access to MRI for AS, within the current health care environment in the UK, is limited due to increasing demand for primary diagnostic examinations, particularly in the post pandemic recovery phase. Emerging technologies in ultrasound imaging may, however, add another diagnostic tool to monitor disease for patients on AS. This proof of concept study is to evaluate whether new multi-parametric ultrasound techniques can safely reduce the number of MRIs required for effective AS.
Read more
Men being investigated for PCa will be invited to undergo an ultrasound examination of their prostate, via the rectum, in addition to the diagnostic MRI undertaken as part of normal care. The findings of the ultrasound will be directly compared with the MRI and any subsequent biopsy samples taken as part of routine care. Those who then progress onto AS will be invited to undergo regular rectal prostate ultrasound examinations. These will be compared with previous imaging for signs of change.
This study will also evaluate the changing role of practitioners who will be using new technologies and making decisions about disease progression. The ability to implement new techniques will be assessed. All imaging will be undertaken at Castle Hill Hospital over a 24-month period from commencement of the study.
Read the detailed description
Research Plan 1.1 Purpose and design Across the UK prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. Developments in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and the implementation of a targeted biopsy regime, have resulted in a considerable improvement in the detection of prostate cancer.
1.1.1 Clinical context: Prostate cancer can be present as an indolent low-grade cellular change to the tissue but with very little risk of this progressing to a metastatic life threatening disease. Despite the improved diagnostic capabilities, there remain a significant proportion of men in whom low-grade cancer is detected and consequent treatment options may present a higher risk to quality of life than the presence of the localised disease. Both active surveillance (AS) and watchful waiting (WW) involve proactively monitoring the patient for signs of disease progression rather than undertaking treatment immediately.
The improvements in MRI imaging and reporting indicate that regular scans would add valuable information for patients under AS but capacity is significantly hindering this as an available application.
1.1.2 Technological improvements Emerging technologies in ultrasound imaging, which is less hindered by capacity issues within the UK and is utilised, to a degree, in current standard care, may add another diagnostic tool to monitor disease for patients on AS. A multi-parametric ultrasound assessment may provide the crucial diagnostic features that enables ultrasound imaging to be used to monitor disease. A crucial question remains as to whether the use of additional imaging and health care intervention could improve patient outcomes.
1.1.3 Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) Despite the publication of a defined framework for the development and evaluation of research, there remain substantial problems in the design and conduct of studies introducing complex interventions and their subsequent implementation. If a new technology provides good diagnostic results but is cumbersome and complex to use, it is unlikely to be implemented into routine healthcare practice. A recognised gap exists between developing new treatments and knowledge, and implementing these in practice for the patient who may benefit. An understanding of the ability to implement the proposed new complex ultrasound techniques in real-life clinical practice will be explored within this proof of concept study.
1.2 Study Aim This aim of this proof of concept study is to evaluate if emerging ultrasound technologies can provide reliable and reproducible imaging that can be used to assess the prostate gland in men with known localised prostate cancer and who are being managed with active surveillance.
As with many research studies, data is collected in a strict and controlled environment which may not readily translate into a real life clinical setting. The feasibility for implementing changes to the imaging pathways in active surveillance will also be evaluated with the clinical team delivering the current and future service.
1.3 Primary and secondary objectives 1.3.1 Primary objective The primary objective of the study is to evaluate if emerging multi-parametric ultrasound technologies can provide a viable tool to be used in the active surveillance of men with known localised prostate cancer.
1.3.2 Secondary objectives
Secondary objectives of this study are:
- to evaluate the diagnostic parameters of diagnostic ultrasound that can be utilised to assess disease within the prostate gland.
- To evaluate the diagnostic parameters of diagnostic ultrasound that can be utilised to assess disease progression within the prostate gland.
- To evaluate if the intra and inter operator variability in the assessment of ultrasound imaging parameters of the prostate gland can be investigated.
- To determine if a suitable standardise imaging protocol and reporting tool or model could be utilised in the reporting of transrectal ultrasound imaging of the prostate.
- To gain a better understanding of how new ultrasound technology and techniques can be implemented and embedded into clinical practice.
1.4 Study phases
This study is being undertaken as a doctorate research project but within the National Health Service (NHS) care setting. The study will consist of four phases:
1.4.1 Phase 1: In this initial phase, eligible men who have consented to participate will undergo a transrectal ultrasound examination with a standard ultrasound probe and, at the same attendance a transrectal ultrasound examination with a new and novel probe using 29MHz scanning frequency. The images obtained from this examination will be retrospectively compared with the MRI imaging that has been obtained as part of the standard care pathway. The images obtained will be reviewed by two health care practitioners with experience in prostate imaging and the outcomes of these reviews compared to evaluate agreement levels.
1.4.2 Phase 2: The second phase of the study will evaluate the use of multiparametric standard and micro ultrasound in the assessment of men who are on an AS or WW pathway. This phase the study will evaluate if there are any changes in the findings at repeat ultrasound examinations that can indicate disease progression. Eligible men, who have consented to participate, will again undergo a transrectal ultrasound examination with a standard ultrasound probe and, at the same attendance a transrectal ultrasound examination with a new and novel probe using 29 megahertz (MHz) scanning frequency.
1.4.3 Phase 3: The process and acceptability of implementing new interventions and technologies into everyday clinical practice is frequently overlooked following research trials. This third phase will explore the views of the health care practitioners, who have consented to participate, regarding the use and implementation of the proposed new technologies; skill mix between these professional groups will be required for successful long term practice. The participants will be recruited from differing professionals within the staff groups of Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. An adapted survey tool, derived from normalisation process theory framework, will be used to better understand how and if the new, complex, multi-parametric ultrasound techniques can be implementation within the organisational setting of everyday routine practice. A baseline assessment of confidence in knowledge and skills related to prostate cancer evaluation using ultrasound will be made.
1.4.3.1 Staff training: Participants in phase 3 will then be provided with training using specific multi-parametric ultrasound (US) techniques and will regularly score multi-parametric US examinations. Participants' confidence in knowledge and skills, related to prostate cancer evaluation using US, and how the participants feel this technology can be implemented into regular patient care will be assessed, using the same adapted survey at baseline at 6 - 12 months' post implementation.
1.4.4 Phase 4: A fourth phase of the study is planned. Once outcomes from the initial 3 phases of the study are known the lead researcher intends to organise a national meeting where results will be presented and discussion held between the research team and other centres providing a diagnostic prostate cancer service. The aim of this event is to disseminate results and to obtain a wider understanding of its acceptance beyond local practice. Multi-parametric ultrasound is novel and there may be resistance to wider implementation. Opportunities and barriers will be explored at this phase 4 event.
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Being tested
- Multi-parametric ultrasound
- Keywords
- Ultrasound, Micro-ultrasound, Active surveillance
- Medical subject headings
- Prostatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Multi-parametric ultrasoundDiagnostic test
Also called Micro-ultrasound
Diagnostic ultrasound parameters used to evaluate the prostate. Transrectal scans will be performed
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-parametric and micro ultrasound | Experimental | Transrectal ultrasound imaging in men with suspected or known low grade prostate cancer using both standard and micro-ultrasound technology Receives: Diagnostic Test: Multi-parametric ultrasound |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The number of identified changes on ultrasound, within the prostate glands of participants, that correlate with changes identified on the gold standard active surveillance imaging
Ultrasound will be used to image the prostate in patients with suspected and known low grade prostate cancer. The ultrasound images will be compared with the gold standard of prostate MRI, and the histology, from any biopsy undertaken. The ultrasound images will be evaluated to assess for any changes to the appearance of the prostate to understand if prostate disease progression can be detected.
Measured: 24-Months from commencement of the study
Secondary outcomes (1)
Change in confidence and knowledge in users of new ultrasound techniques will be measured using a normalization process theory survey completed at baseline and at 12 months following implementation of the study.
Staff using new technology and novel diagnostic parameters may be challenged by this different technique. Implementation into clinical practice may be difficult. This phase of the study will evaluate the barriers and opportunities the new technology can bring to staff working in this field
Measured: 12-months from commencement of this study
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Apr 2022
- Study start6 Dec 2021
- Primary completion1 Nov 2023
- Study completion27 Feb 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Prostate CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Model description
- Men with suspected or low grade prostate cancer
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Collaborators
- University of Hull
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Pamela Parker, MSc, Principal investigator, Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05326282
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- R2706
- Acronym
- ERUP
- Status last verified
- Feb 2023
- First submitted
- 6 Sep 2021
- Last updated
- 28 Feb 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Anonymised data will be shared. This will take the form of ultrasound images that have been stored with all identifiable data removed. The ultrasound images will be shared and available for review with other researchers
Publications
Parker PC, Harrison G. Educating the future sonographic workforce: membership survey report from the British Medical Ultrasound Society. Ultrasound. 2015 Nov;23(4):231-41. doi: 10.1177/1742271X15605344. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
PubMed 27433263da Silva V, Cagiannos I, Lavallee LT, Mallick R, Witiuk K, Cnossen S, Eastham JA, Fergusson DA, Morash C, Breau RH. An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017 Aug;11(8):238-243. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.4093.
PubMed 28798822de Brun T, O'Reilly-de Brun M, O'Donnell CA, MacFarlane A. Learning from doing: the case for combining normalisation process theory and participatory learning and action research methodology for primary healthcare implementation research. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Aug 3;16(a):346. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1587-z.
PubMed 27488361Field LJ, Snaith BA. Developing radiographer roles in the context of advanced and consultant practice. J Med Radiat Sci. 2013 Mar;60(1):11-5. doi: 10.1002/jmrs.2. Epub 2013 Feb 5.
PubMed 26229602Finch TL, Girling M, May CR, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, McColl E, Steen IN, Cook C, Vernazza CR, Mackintosh N, Sharma S, Barbery G, Steele J, Rapley T. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 15;18(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0591-x.
PubMed 30442094Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, Davis M, Peters TJ, Turner EL, Martin RM, Oxley J, Robinson M, Staffurth J, Walsh E, Bollina P, Catto J, Doble A, Doherty A, Gillatt D, Kockelbergh R, Kynaston H, Paul A, Powell P, Prescott S, Rosario DJ, Rowe E, Neal DE; ProtecT Study Group. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1415-1424. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606220. Epub 2016 Sep 14.
PubMed 27626136Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, Jethava V, Zhang L, Jain S, Yamamoto T, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 20;33(3):272-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.1192. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
PubMed 25512465
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 28 Feb 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Proof of Concept Study Evaluating the Role of Emerging Ultrasound Technologies in the Assessment and Monitoring of Localised Prostate Cancer in Men on an Active Surveillance Programme
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05326282
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ERUP / R2706
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Keywords
- Ultrasound, Micro-ultrasound, Active surveillance
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS TrustOther government
- Collaborators
- University of Hull
- Study start
- 6 Dec 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Nov 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 27 Feb 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 Apr 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.
Active surveillance (AS) is becoming an increasingly common treatment option for men who have been diagnosed with localised low-grade prostate cancer (PCa). Low-grade disease is commonly noted by clinicians to be clinically insignificant cancer but remains a psychological burden to many men in this cohort. There is consensus that regular review is required for men on AS so that early treatment can be undertaken if there is disease progression, and to support men living with a cancer diagnosis. Some AS protocols, including National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE), advocate the use of MRI as a regular part of the monitoring pathway.
Unfortunately, access to MRI for AS, within the current health care environment in the UK, is limited due to increasing demand for primary diagnostic examinations, particularly in the post pandemic recovery phase. Emerging technologies in ultrasound imaging may, however, add another diagnostic tool to monitor disease for patients on AS. This proof of concept study is to evaluate whether new multi-parametric ultrasound techniques can safely reduce the number of MRIs required for effective AS.
Men being investigated for PCa will be invited to undergo an ultrasound examination of their prostate, via the rectum, in addition to the diagnostic MRI undertaken as part of normal care. The findings of the ultrasound will be directly compared with the MRI and any subsequent biopsy samples taken as part of routine care. Those who then progress onto AS will be invited to undergo regular rectal prostate ultrasound examinations. These will be compared with previous imaging for signs of change.
This study will also evaluate the changing role of practitioners who will be using new technologies and making decisions about disease progression. The ability to implement new techniques will be assessed. All imaging will be undertaken at Castle Hill Hospital over a 24-month period from commencement of the study.
Detailed description
Research Plan 1.1 Purpose and design Across the UK prostate cancer is the most common cancer in men. Developments in magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and the implementation of a targeted biopsy regime, have resulted in a considerable improvement in the detection of prostate cancer.
1.1.1 Clinical context: Prostate cancer can be present as an indolent low-grade cellular change to the tissue but with very little risk of this progressing to a metastatic life threatening disease. Despite the improved diagnostic capabilities, there remain a significant proportion of men in whom low-grade cancer is detected and consequent treatment options may present a higher risk to quality of life than the presence of the localised disease. Both active surveillance (AS) and watchful waiting (WW) involve proactively monitoring the patient for signs of disease progression rather than undertaking treatment immediately.
The improvements in MRI imaging and reporting indicate that regular scans would add valuable information for patients under AS but capacity is significantly hindering this as an available application.
1.1.2 Technological improvements Emerging technologies in ultrasound imaging, which is less hindered by capacity issues within the UK and is utilised, to a degree, in current standard care, may add another diagnostic tool to monitor disease for patients on AS. A multi-parametric ultrasound assessment may provide the crucial diagnostic features that enables ultrasound imaging to be used to monitor disease. A crucial question remains as to whether the use of additional imaging and health care intervention could improve patient outcomes.
1.1.3 Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) Despite the publication of a defined framework for the development and evaluation of research, there remain substantial problems in the design and conduct of studies introducing complex interventions and their subsequent implementation. If a new technology provides good diagnostic results but is cumbersome and complex to use, it is unlikely to be implemented into routine healthcare practice. A recognised gap exists between developing new treatments and knowledge, and implementing these in practice for the patient who may benefit. An understanding of the ability to implement the proposed new complex ultrasound techniques in real-life clinical practice will be explored within this proof of concept study.
1.2 Study Aim This aim of this proof of concept study is to evaluate if emerging ultrasound technologies can provide reliable and reproducible imaging that can be used to assess the prostate gland in men with known localised prostate cancer and who are being managed with active surveillance.
As with many research studies, data is collected in a strict and controlled environment which may not readily translate into a real life clinical setting. The feasibility for implementing changes to the imaging pathways in active surveillance will also be evaluated with the clinical team delivering the current and future service.
1.3 Primary and secondary objectives 1.3.1 Primary objective The primary objective of the study is to evaluate if emerging multi-parametric ultrasound technologies can provide a viable tool to be used in the active surveillance of men with known localised prostate cancer.
1.3.2 Secondary objectives
Secondary objectives of this study are:
- to evaluate the diagnostic parameters of diagnostic ultrasound that can be utilised to assess disease within the prostate gland.
- To evaluate the diagnostic parameters of diagnostic ultrasound that can be utilised to assess disease progression within the prostate gland.
- To evaluate if the intra and inter operator variability in the assessment of ultrasound imaging parameters of the prostate gland can be investigated.
- To determine if a suitable standardise imaging protocol and reporting tool or model could be utilised in the reporting of transrectal ultrasound imaging of the prostate.
- To gain a better understanding of how new ultrasound technology and techniques can be implemented and embedded into clinical practice.
1.4 Study phases
This study is being undertaken as a doctorate research project but within the National Health Service (NHS) care setting. The study will consist of four phases:
1.4.1 Phase 1: In this initial phase, eligible men who have consented to participate will undergo a transrectal ultrasound examination with a standard ultrasound probe and, at the same attendance a transrectal ultrasound examination with a new and novel probe using 29MHz scanning frequency. The images obtained from this examination will be retrospectively compared with the MRI imaging that has been obtained as part of the standard care pathway. The images obtained will be reviewed by two health care practitioners with experience in prostate imaging and the outcomes of these reviews compared to evaluate agreement levels.
1.4.2 Phase 2: The second phase of the study will evaluate the use of multiparametric standard and micro ultrasound in the assessment of men who are on an AS or WW pathway. This phase the study will evaluate if there are any changes in the findings at repeat ultrasound examinations that can indicate disease progression. Eligible men, who have consented to participate, will again undergo a transrectal ultrasound examination with a standard ultrasound probe and, at the same attendance a transrectal ultrasound examination with a new and novel probe using 29 megahertz (MHz) scanning frequency.
1.4.3 Phase 3: The process and acceptability of implementing new interventions and technologies into everyday clinical practice is frequently overlooked following research trials. This third phase will explore the views of the health care practitioners, who have consented to participate, regarding the use and implementation of the proposed new technologies; skill mix between these professional groups will be required for successful long term practice. The participants will be recruited from differing professionals within the staff groups of Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust. An adapted survey tool, derived from normalisation process theory framework, will be used to better understand how and if the new, complex, multi-parametric ultrasound techniques can be implementation within the organisational setting of everyday routine practice. A baseline assessment of confidence in knowledge and skills related to prostate cancer evaluation using ultrasound will be made.
1.4.3.1 Staff training: Participants in phase 3 will then be provided with training using specific multi-parametric ultrasound (US) techniques and will regularly score multi-parametric US examinations. Participants' confidence in knowledge and skills, related to prostate cancer evaluation using US, and how the participants feel this technology can be implemented into regular patient care will be assessed, using the same adapted survey at baseline at 6 - 12 months' post implementation.
1.4.4 Phase 4: A fourth phase of the study is planned. Once outcomes from the initial 3 phases of the study are known the lead researcher intends to organise a national meeting where results will be presented and discussion held between the research team and other centres providing a diagnostic prostate cancer service. The aim of this event is to disseminate results and to obtain a wider understanding of its acceptance beyond local practice. Multi-parametric ultrasound is novel and there may be resistance to wider implementation. Opportunities and barriers will be explored at this phase 4 event.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- Men with suspected or low grade prostate cancer
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-parametric and micro ultrasound | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: Multi-parametric ultrasoundTransrectal ultrasound imaging in men with suspected or known low grade prostate cancer using both standard and micro-ultrasound technology |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (37 listed)
- he recruitment criteria and pathway for the clinical phases of the study are outlined in the flow charts, appendix 1 and appendix 2. These identify when the participants will be invited to participate, when consent will be obtained and the broad outline of the involvement in the study that participants can expect.
- Men referred to urology within Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust with suspected, but undiagnosed, prostate cancer and:
- Age equal to 75 or less
- PSA equal to 20 or less
- Life expectancy of 10 years or more
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- the recruitment criteria and pathway for the clinical phases of the study are outlined in the flow charts, appendix 1 and appendix 2. These identify when the participants will be invited to participate, when consent will be obtained and the broad outline of the involvement in the study that participants can expect.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Multi-parametric ultrasoundAlso: Micro-ultrasoundDiagnostic ultrasound parameters used to evaluate the prostate. Transrectal scans will be performed | Diagnostic test | Multi-parametric and micro ultrasound |
Primary outcome
The number of identified changes on ultrasound, within the prostate glands of participants, that correlate with changes identified on the gold standard active surveillance imaging
Time frame: 24-Months from commencement of the study
Ultrasound will be used to image the prostate in patients with suspected and known low grade prostate cancer. The ultrasound images will be compared with the gold standard of prostate MRI, and the histology, from any biopsy undertaken. The ultrasound images will be evaluated to assess for any changes to the appearance of the prostate to understand if prostate disease progression can be detected.
1 secondary outcome
Change in confidence and knowledge in users of new ultrasound techniques will be measured using a normalization process theory survey completed at baseline and at 12 months following implementation of the study.
Time frame: 12-months from commencement of this study
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 28 Feb 2024.
- Background: PubMed 27433263Parker PC, Harrison G. Educating the future sonographic workforce: membership survey report from the British Medical Ultrasound Society. Ultrasound. 2015 Nov;23(4):231-41. doi: 10.1177/1742271X15605344. Epub 2015 Sep 29.
- Results publication: PubMed 28798822da Silva V, Cagiannos I, Lavallee LT, Mallick R, Witiuk K, Cnossen S, Eastham JA, Fergusson DA, Morash C, Breau RH. An assessment of Prostate Cancer Research International: Active Surveillance (PRIAS) criteria for active surveillance of clinically low-risk prostate cancer patients. Can Urol Assoc J. 2017 Aug;11(8):238-243. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.4093.
- Results publication: PubMed 27488361de Brun T, O'Reilly-de Brun M, O'Donnell CA, MacFarlane A. Learning from doing: the case for combining normalisation process theory and participatory learning and action research methodology for primary healthcare implementation research. BMC Health Serv Res. 2016 Aug 3;16(a):346. doi: 10.1186/s12913-016-1587-z.
- Results publication: PubMed 26229602Field LJ, Snaith BA. Developing radiographer roles in the context of advanced and consultant practice. J Med Radiat Sci. 2013 Mar;60(1):11-5. doi: 10.1002/jmrs.2. Epub 2013 Feb 5.
- Results publication: PubMed 30442094Finch TL, Girling M, May CR, Mair FS, Murray E, Treweek S, McColl E, Steen IN, Cook C, Vernazza CR, Mackintosh N, Sharma S, Barbery G, Steele J, Rapley T. Improving the normalization of complex interventions: part 2 - validation of the NoMAD instrument for assessing implementation work based on normalization process theory (NPT). BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 15;18(1):135. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0591-x.
- Results publication: PubMed 27626136Hamdy FC, Donovan JL, Lane JA, Mason M, Metcalfe C, Holding P, Davis M, Peters TJ, Turner EL, Martin RM, Oxley J, Robinson M, Staffurth J, Walsh E, Bollina P, Catto J, Doble A, Doherty A, Gillatt D, Kockelbergh R, Kynaston H, Paul A, Powell P, Prescott S, Rosario DJ, Rowe E, Neal DE; ProtecT Study Group. 10-Year Outcomes after Monitoring, Surgery, or Radiotherapy for Localized Prostate Cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016 Oct 13;375(15):1415-1424. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1606220. Epub 2016 Sep 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 25512465Klotz L, Vesprini D, Sethukavalan P, Jethava V, Zhang L, Jain S, Yamamoto T, Mamedov A, Loblaw A. Long-term follow-up of a large active surveillance cohort of patients with prostate cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 20;33(3):272-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.55.1192. Epub 2014 Dec 15.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Anonymised data will be shared. This will take the form of ultrasound images that have been stored with all identifiable data removed. The ultrasound images will be shared and available for review with other researchers
Related trials for Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Active, not recruitingObservational study
MRI Fusion Biopsy vs. Micro-Ultrasound Guided Biopsy
Prostate Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
STAR0602 With Nivolumab in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer and in Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer, and STAR0602 Alone in Thymic Carcinoma
NSCLC, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Recruiting
Rehabilitation and Sex Therapy to Optimize Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Urinary Incontinence
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.
Pamela Parker, MSc principal investigator
Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Multi-parametric ultrasound in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Hull University Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust at 1 site in United Kingdom.
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 37 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 28 Feb 2024. 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 United Kingdom. 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?
The number of identified changes on ultrasound, within the prostate glands of participants, that correlate with changes identified on the gold standard active surveillance imaging (time frame: 24-Months from commencement of the study). 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 NCT05326282, which also lists 7 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 28 Feb 2024.