Lung Cancer Stage IVPhase 2Re-Induce 2NCT06024941
Re-induction of a Systemic Immune Response in Metastatic or Locally Recurrent Lung Cancer
A Phase 2 study testing Radiation in people with Lung Cancer Stage IV, run by Maastricht Radiation Oncology at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who after an initial response to immunotherapy of chemo-immunotherapy show diffuse disease progression are treated with chemotherapy, with a median PFS of about 3 months and a high incidence of important toxicity or by continuation of immune therapy when the… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Lung Cancer Stage IV
- What is being tested?
- Radiation
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- 1 Dec 2024to 1 Dec 2026
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Stage IV NSCLC
- An initial partial or complete remission under immune therapy alone or concurrent immune therapy and chemotherapy
- Subsequently progressive disease according to RECIST 1.1 criteria
- Considered by the treating physician to be able to continue the same immune treatment as standard of care
- At least two different lesions should show progressive disease
- At least one progressing lesion should be eligible for radiation
Who cannot join
- Patients with any grade 3 or higher toxicity from previous therapy
- Patients who are not eligible for continuation of the immune therapy according to standard practice
- Corticosteroids in a dose above 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Corticoids used as supportive therapy for systemic or radiotherapy are allowed
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Netherlands1 site
Maastricht Radiation Oncology (Maastro)
Maastricht, 6229 ET
About this study
Official title: Re-induction of a Systemic Immune Response After Initial Response With Immune Therapy With Single-dose Radiotherapy in Metastatic or Locally Recurrent Lung Cancer: A Prospective Phase II Trial (Re-Induce 2)
Patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who after an initial response to immunotherapy of chemo-immunotherapy show diffuse disease progression are treated with chemotherapy, with a median PFS of about 3 months and a high incidence of important toxicity or by continuation of immune therapy when the growth rate of the tumours is low. In a previous study, it was showed that irradiating a single metastatic lesion and continuation of immune therapy resulted in a median PFS time was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.0 months). At three months of follow-up, the PFS rate was 62.5%, at six months 37.5% and at 12 months 17.9%. The median OS for all patients was 14.9 months (95% CI, 12.2-21.5 months). Toxicity was hardly observed. This was obtained with a few fractions of radiotherapy. There is biological rationale to deliver this radiation in a single fraction of 10 Gy.
Objective: The primary objective is to investigate if a single fraction of 10 Gy is not inferior to a more fractionated schedule, which would add to the convenience for the patient, even less toxicity and costs.
Read more
Study design: Prospective, single-arm phase II trial. Study population: Patients with stage IV NSCLC who initially showed a partial or complete remission under immune therapy alone or concurrent immune therapy and chemotherapy and now show progressive disease according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. At least two different lesions should show progressive disease. Patients should be able to continue the same immune therapy (i.e. no adverse events grade 3 or more).
Intervention: Patients continue the same immune therapy they already received and get radiotherapy to one progressing lesion. The lesion may or may not be symptomatic. The preferred radiotherapy dose is 10 Gy in 1 fraction, but other fractionation schedules (e.g. 24 Gy/ 3 fractions, 30 Gy/ 10 fractions, 20 Gy/ 5 fractions, 20-24 Gy / 1 fraction for stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases), including so-called isotoxic strategies are allowed if these are standard for a certain location or palliative indication in the body.
Main study parameters/endpoints: Progression-free survival (PFS).
Read the detailed description
Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has always had a remarkably high mortality, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of only 6%.However, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting the programmed death protein (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis have changed this outcome significantly. Patients with NSCLC who have been treated with ICI, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, are surviving longer as compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone,5-14 with 5-year OS rates as high as 15-30%.This has led to the implementation of ICI in clinical practice, namely in patients with metastatic NSCLC without specific gene alterations.
Despite overall improved survival rates, a considerable number of patients fail to achieve a response when treated with ICI (primary resistance) or develop resistance after an initial period of clinical and radiological response (acquired resistance). Resistance to ICI is thought to be the result of tumor cell intrinsic factors and an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, resulting in the suppression of effective anti-tumor immunity. Currently, treatment options in case of resistance to PD1/PD-L1 blockade are limited, with chemotherapy being standard of care outside clinical trials. The PFS and OS in fit patients receiving double-agent chemotherapy after progression are approximately 5 and 12 months, while for those receiving single-agent chemotherapy only 4 and 10 months, respectively. Therefore, exploring treatments for overcoming ICI resistance is warranted.
Radiation therapy (RT) is an effective and common treatment in advanced NSCLC, playing a major role in symptom control, improving quality of life and potentially survival in oligometastatic disease. Moderately hypofractionated RT to tumor or metastases, while sparing lymphoid tissues such as lymph nodes, bone marrow and the circulating blood pool, was shown to enhance the immune response with clinical benefit.
Acquired immunotherapy resistance is a common event in NSCLC, with most patients exhibiting progression within the first 6 months (20%) or the first year of treatment (35%). Clinical trials directed at overcoming immunotherapy resistance in NSCLC have mainly focused on the escalation of systemic therapy by dual checkpoint blockade or by addition of supporting substances. A phase II trial investigated the role of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in this setting and showed no benefit. In contrast, the randomized phase II study of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab showed improved OS of 14.5 months versus 11.6 months with standard of care. In other trials investigating chemotherapy plus immunotherapy after ICI-resistance, the continuation of immunotherapy beyond disease progression also resulted in improved outcomes compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone.
Since previous works have demonstrated that the combination of ICI with RT in immunotherapy-naïve patients has a relevant impact on PFS, OS and rate of abscopal responses, local radiation has also been considered a viable option for overcoming immunotherapy resistance.
In the predecessor of the current study, "Re-induction of a systemic immune response after initial response with immune therapy with radiotherapy in metastatic or locally recurrent lung cancer: A prospective phase II trial", NCT03406468, the clinical benefit of adding radiotherapy to immune therapy was investigated. The results of a similar study at the University Hospital Freiburg, Germany, RadImmun-NSCLC ("Evaluation of systemic effects of combined palliative radiation therapy and immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer after insufficient response to immune checkpoint blockade", DRKS00013531), were pooled [submitted manuscript].
A total of 48 patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2021 in Freiburg and Maastricht, 25 patients within the RadImmun-NSCLC trial and 23 patients within the Re-Induction trial. All patients had stage IV NSCLC, with the majority having adenocarcinoma.
Importantly, following progression, 21.9% of patients were salvaged again by using local irradiation.
The median PFS time was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.0 months). At three months of follow-up, the PFS rate was 62.5%, at six months 37.5% and at 12 months 17.9%.
With 62.5% of patients having no tumor progression three months after RT, the results of the trials exceeded the initial hypothesis and suggest that radiation can boost the systemic immune response, at least temporarily. Moreover, the median OS following RT was 14.9 months, which is significantly higher than historical data on chemotherapy in the same context. These results are similar to those obtained by escalation of systemic treatment with dual checkpoint blockade or the combination of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab. However, in contrast to the strategy to add another pharmacological agent, the rate of high-grade adverse events was minimized in the study by keeping the immune treatment unchanged (25% versus 34-42%). The results are in line with previous studies showing low toxicity of the combination between stereotactic RT and immunotherapy.
Similar positive results were achieved by a prospective trial investigating the RT-ICI combination in oligo progressive metastatic NSCLC and melanoma patients. As approximately 40% of patients had malignant melanoma and 50% were primarily refractory to ICI, a clear interpretation of the results in the context of acquired resistance in NSCLC is not possible. Furthermore, patients were not classified as progressive in this trial as long as they could be salvaged by further RT, which could explain the unexpectedly high median PFS of 14.2 months.
In a multicenter randomized phase 2 trial evaluating durvalumab plus tremelimumab and RT for NSCLC in the same setting, neither low-dose nor hypofractionated RT could enhance the systemic response compared to the dual checkpoint blockade alone. However, median PFS values were generally higher in this trial (4-4.6 months) as compared to standard chemotherapy. In the study, the initial ICI was maintained, and the addition of RT alone led to comparable PFS values of 4.9 months, with about 18% of patients still having no further progression at 12 months.
There is evidence that particular dose fractionations may lead to a more pronounced immune modulation than others. Taking into consideration the heterogeneous dose regimens in our pooled cohort, it appears that any type of hypofractionated RT might be efficient in prolonging PFS. A recently published study suggests that this beneficial effect might be dependent on tumor aneuploidy, which could be used as a prognostic biomarker. In Maastro's trial, the aggressiveness of the tumor, characterized by its metastasis growth rate, seemed to impact outcome, with slower-growing tumors having an improved PFS. Some studies also found a significant correlation between pretherapeutic tumor growth and OS, however others have not. Following RT, the lesion velocity decreased, attaining at least stable disease in over 90% of patients for a median of 6.2 months.
In Maastro's trial, at least one metastasis had to be left untreated for follow-up. Nevertheless, the incidental partial irradiation of all measurable lesions was noticed in 11 patients, who also showed an improved outcome. The partial irradiation of metastases in combination with immunotherapy has been suggested to have good local efficacy, and the irradiation of all lesions to improve outcome. However, this is only possible in oligometastatic disease. The trial shows that all metastatic NSCLC patients benefit from RT of selected lesions, presumably with improved results in those with a slower tumor dynamic.
Studies in Maastricht and in Freiburg in patients with NSCLC are indicative that the immune activation already occurs within days after a single fraction of radiotherapy, likely after 10 Gy. Therefore, a single dose of radiation might be as effective to stimulate the immune system as a hypofractionated regimen such as 24 Gy/ 3 fractions in our previous study, while improving the convenience of the treatment for patients, decrease the costs of the intervention and even further reduce toxicity. A single fraction of 10 Gy has been extensively investigated and used for palliative radiotherapy and has been shown to be safe.
The aim of the present study is therefore to investigate if a single fraction of 10 Gy will also lead to similar disease control rates in patients showing progressive disease after an initial response of immunotherapy as 3x8 Gy fractionated radiotherapy.
- Conditions
- Lung Cancer Stage IV
- Being tested
- Radiation
- Medical subject headings
- Lung Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
RadiationRadiation
Radiation to one or more progressive lesions. Preferably 1x10Gy, but also 3x8Gy, 10x 3Gy, 5x4Gy or 1x20-24Gy is possible.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Radiation | Experimental | Radiation to one progressive lesion Receives: Radiation: Radiation |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Progression-free
Progression-free survival (PFS)
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Secondary outcomes (7)
Regression
Number of patients who show regression of the irradiated lesion
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Remission rate
Number of patients who show remission (RECIST 1.1) of the non-irradiated lesion(s)
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Toxicity
Number of participants with treatment-related adverse events as assessed by CTCAE v4.0Toxicity (CTCAE 4.0) of this combination of remission and regression
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Overall survival
Overall survival (OS)
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
PFS second course
PFS of patients who received a second course of radiotherapy at the time of disease progression
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Number
Number of patients who received a second course of radiotherapy at the time of disease progression
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Relation between the growth rate of the fastest growing metastasis in the 3 months preceding radiotherapy and PFS
Relation between the growth rate of the fastest growing metastasis in the 3 months preceding radiotherapy and PFS
Measured: 3 months after radiotherapy
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Sep 2023
- Study start1 Dec 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
Why it stopped: Submission not finished
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Lung Cancer Stage IVStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Maastricht Radiation Oncology
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Dirk De Ruysscher, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Maastro
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06024941
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Re-Induce 2
- Acronym
- Re-Induce 2
- Status last verified
- Mar 2024
- First submitted
- 22 Aug 2023
- Last updated
- 19 Sep 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 19 Sep 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Re-induction of a Systemic Immune Response After Initial Response With Immune Therapy With Single-dose Radiotherapy in Metastatic or Locally Recurrent Lung Cancer: A Prospective Phase II Trial (Re-Induce 2)
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06024941
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Re-Induce 2 / Re-Induce 2
- Conditions
- Lung Cancer Stage IV
- Phase
- Phase 2
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: Submission not finished
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Maastricht Radiation OncologyUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Dec 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Dec 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Sep 2023 (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.
Patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who after an initial response to immunotherapy of chemo-immunotherapy show diffuse disease progression are treated with chemotherapy, with a median PFS of about 3 months and a high incidence of important toxicity or by continuation of immune therapy when the growth rate of the tumours is low. In a previous study, it was showed that irradiating a single metastatic lesion and continuation of immune therapy resulted in a median PFS time was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.0 months). At three months of follow-up, the PFS rate was 62.5%, at six months 37.5% and at 12 months 17.9%. The median OS for all patients was 14.9 months (95% CI, 12.2-21.5 months). Toxicity was hardly observed. This was obtained with a few fractions of radiotherapy. There is biological rationale to deliver this radiation in a single fraction of 10 Gy.
Objective: The primary objective is to investigate if a single fraction of 10 Gy is not inferior to a more fractionated schedule, which would add to the convenience for the patient, even less toxicity and costs.
Study design: Prospective, single-arm phase II trial. Study population: Patients with stage IV NSCLC who initially showed a partial or complete remission under immune therapy alone or concurrent immune therapy and chemotherapy and now show progressive disease according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. At least two different lesions should show progressive disease. Patients should be able to continue the same immune therapy (i.e. no adverse events grade 3 or more).
Intervention: Patients continue the same immune therapy they already received and get radiotherapy to one progressing lesion. The lesion may or may not be symptomatic. The preferred radiotherapy dose is 10 Gy in 1 fraction, but other fractionation schedules (e.g. 24 Gy/ 3 fractions, 30 Gy/ 10 fractions, 20 Gy/ 5 fractions, 20-24 Gy / 1 fraction for stereotactic radiotherapy for brain metastases), including so-called isotoxic strategies are allowed if these are standard for a certain location or palliative indication in the body.
Main study parameters/endpoints: Progression-free survival (PFS).
Detailed description
Metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) has always had a remarkably high mortality, with a 5-year overall survival (OS) rate of only 6%.However, immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) targeting the programmed death protein (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) axis have changed this outcome significantly. Patients with NSCLC who have been treated with ICI, either as monotherapy or in combination with chemotherapy, are surviving longer as compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone,5-14 with 5-year OS rates as high as 15-30%.This has led to the implementation of ICI in clinical practice, namely in patients with metastatic NSCLC without specific gene alterations.
Despite overall improved survival rates, a considerable number of patients fail to achieve a response when treated with ICI (primary resistance) or develop resistance after an initial period of clinical and radiological response (acquired resistance). Resistance to ICI is thought to be the result of tumor cell intrinsic factors and an immunosuppressive tumor microenvironment, resulting in the suppression of effective anti-tumor immunity. Currently, treatment options in case of resistance to PD1/PD-L1 blockade are limited, with chemotherapy being standard of care outside clinical trials. The PFS and OS in fit patients receiving double-agent chemotherapy after progression are approximately 5 and 12 months, while for those receiving single-agent chemotherapy only 4 and 10 months, respectively. Therefore, exploring treatments for overcoming ICI resistance is warranted.
Radiation therapy (RT) is an effective and common treatment in advanced NSCLC, playing a major role in symptom control, improving quality of life and potentially survival in oligometastatic disease. Moderately hypofractionated RT to tumor or metastases, while sparing lymphoid tissues such as lymph nodes, bone marrow and the circulating blood pool, was shown to enhance the immune response with clinical benefit.
Acquired immunotherapy resistance is a common event in NSCLC, with most patients exhibiting progression within the first 6 months (20%) or the first year of treatment (35%). Clinical trials directed at overcoming immunotherapy resistance in NSCLC have mainly focused on the escalation of systemic therapy by dual checkpoint blockade or by addition of supporting substances. A phase II trial investigated the role of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in this setting and showed no benefit. In contrast, the randomized phase II study of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab showed improved OS of 14.5 months versus 11.6 months with standard of care. In other trials investigating chemotherapy plus immunotherapy after ICI-resistance, the continuation of immunotherapy beyond disease progression also resulted in improved outcomes compared to patients receiving chemotherapy alone.
Since previous works have demonstrated that the combination of ICI with RT in immunotherapy-naïve patients has a relevant impact on PFS, OS and rate of abscopal responses, local radiation has also been considered a viable option for overcoming immunotherapy resistance.
In the predecessor of the current study, "Re-induction of a systemic immune response after initial response with immune therapy with radiotherapy in metastatic or locally recurrent lung cancer: A prospective phase II trial", NCT03406468, the clinical benefit of adding radiotherapy to immune therapy was investigated. The results of a similar study at the University Hospital Freiburg, Germany, RadImmun-NSCLC ("Evaluation of systemic effects of combined palliative radiation therapy and immunotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer after insufficient response to immune checkpoint blockade", DRKS00013531), were pooled [submitted manuscript].
A total of 48 patients were enrolled between March 2018 and September 2021 in Freiburg and Maastricht, 25 patients within the RadImmun-NSCLC trial and 23 patients within the Re-Induction trial. All patients had stage IV NSCLC, with the majority having adenocarcinoma.
Importantly, following progression, 21.9% of patients were salvaged again by using local irradiation.
The median PFS time was 4.9 months (95% CI, 3.0-7.0 months). At three months of follow-up, the PFS rate was 62.5%, at six months 37.5% and at 12 months 17.9%.
With 62.5% of patients having no tumor progression three months after RT, the results of the trials exceeded the initial hypothesis and suggest that radiation can boost the systemic immune response, at least temporarily. Moreover, the median OS following RT was 14.9 months, which is significantly higher than historical data on chemotherapy in the same context. These results are similar to those obtained by escalation of systemic treatment with dual checkpoint blockade or the combination of ramucirumab and pembrolizumab. However, in contrast to the strategy to add another pharmacological agent, the rate of high-grade adverse events was minimized in the study by keeping the immune treatment unchanged (25% versus 34-42%). The results are in line with previous studies showing low toxicity of the combination between stereotactic RT and immunotherapy.
Similar positive results were achieved by a prospective trial investigating the RT-ICI combination in oligo progressive metastatic NSCLC and melanoma patients. As approximately 40% of patients had malignant melanoma and 50% were primarily refractory to ICI, a clear interpretation of the results in the context of acquired resistance in NSCLC is not possible. Furthermore, patients were not classified as progressive in this trial as long as they could be salvaged by further RT, which could explain the unexpectedly high median PFS of 14.2 months.
In a multicenter randomized phase 2 trial evaluating durvalumab plus tremelimumab and RT for NSCLC in the same setting, neither low-dose nor hypofractionated RT could enhance the systemic response compared to the dual checkpoint blockade alone. However, median PFS values were generally higher in this trial (4-4.6 months) as compared to standard chemotherapy. In the study, the initial ICI was maintained, and the addition of RT alone led to comparable PFS values of 4.9 months, with about 18% of patients still having no further progression at 12 months.
There is evidence that particular dose fractionations may lead to a more pronounced immune modulation than others. Taking into consideration the heterogeneous dose regimens in our pooled cohort, it appears that any type of hypofractionated RT might be efficient in prolonging PFS. A recently published study suggests that this beneficial effect might be dependent on tumor aneuploidy, which could be used as a prognostic biomarker. In Maastro's trial, the aggressiveness of the tumor, characterized by its metastasis growth rate, seemed to impact outcome, with slower-growing tumors having an improved PFS. Some studies also found a significant correlation between pretherapeutic tumor growth and OS, however others have not. Following RT, the lesion velocity decreased, attaining at least stable disease in over 90% of patients for a median of 6.2 months.
In Maastro's trial, at least one metastasis had to be left untreated for follow-up. Nevertheless, the incidental partial irradiation of all measurable lesions was noticed in 11 patients, who also showed an improved outcome. The partial irradiation of metastases in combination with immunotherapy has been suggested to have good local efficacy, and the irradiation of all lesions to improve outcome. However, this is only possible in oligometastatic disease. The trial shows that all metastatic NSCLC patients benefit from RT of selected lesions, presumably with improved results in those with a slower tumor dynamic.
Studies in Maastricht and in Freiburg in patients with NSCLC are indicative that the immune activation already occurs within days after a single fraction of radiotherapy, likely after 10 Gy. Therefore, a single dose of radiation might be as effective to stimulate the immune system as a hypofractionated regimen such as 24 Gy/ 3 fractions in our previous study, while improving the convenience of the treatment for patients, decrease the costs of the intervention and even further reduce toxicity. A single fraction of 10 Gy has been extensively investigated and used for palliative radiotherapy and has been shown to be safe.
The aim of the present study is therefore to investigate if a single fraction of 10 Gy will also lead to similar disease control rates in patients showing progressive disease after an initial response of immunotherapy as 3x8 Gy fractionated radiotherapy.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Treatment
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Radiation | Experimental | Radiation: RadiationRadiation to one progressive lesion |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Stage IV NSCLC
- An initial partial or complete remission under immune therapy alone or concurrent immune therapy and chemotherapy
- Subsequently progressive disease according to RECIST 1.1 criteria
- Considered by the treating physician to be able to continue the same immune treatment as standard of care
- At least two different lesions should show progressive disease
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Patients with any grade 3 or higher toxicity from previous therapy
- Patients who are not eligible for continuation of the immune therapy according to standard practice
- Corticosteroids in a dose above 10 mg prednisone or equivalent per day. Corticoids used as supportive therapy for systemic or radiotherapy are allowed
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 |
|---|---|---|
| RadiationRadiation to one or more progressive lesions. Preferably 1x10Gy, but also 3x8Gy, 10x 3Gy, 5x4Gy or 1x20-24Gy is possible. | Radiation | Radiation |
Primary outcome
Progression-free
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Progression-free survival (PFS)
7 secondary outcomes
Regression
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Remission rate
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Toxicity
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Overall survival
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
PFS second course
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Number
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Relation between the growth rate of the fastest growing metastasis in the 3 months preceding radiotherapy and PFS
Time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 19 Sep 2024.
Related trials for Lung Cancer Stage IV
RecruitingObservational study
A Prospective ,Multicenter ,Non-interventional ,Real-world Study Observing Changes in Molecular Markers Osimertinib Targeted Therapy in EGFRm NSCLC
Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study Evaluating Sotorasib Platinum Doublet Combination Versus Pembrolizumab Platinum Doublet Combination as a Front-Line Therapy in Participants With Stage IV or Advanced Stage IIIB/C Nonsquamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancers (CodeBreaK 202)
Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
A Study of Investigational Agents in Participants With Previously Treated Stage IV Nonsquamous Non-small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) (MK-3475-01H/KEYMAKER-U01)
Carcinoma, Non-Small-Cell Lung
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
CAN-2409 Plus Prodrug With Standard of Care Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor for Stage III/IV NSCLC
Non Small Cell Lung Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Chemotherapy Combined With Immunotherapy Versus Immunotherapy Alone for Older Adults With Stage IIIB-IV Lung Cancer, The ACHIEVE Trial
Advanced Lung Non-Small Cell Carcinoma, Stage IIIB Lung Cancer AJCC v8
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Dirk De Ruysscher, MD, PhD principal investigator
Maastro
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 2 study testing Radiation in people with Lung Cancer Stage IV, run by Maastricht Radiation Oncology at 1 site in Netherlands.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 6 inclusion and 3 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: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 19 Sep 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 Netherlands. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
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?
Progression-free (time frame: 3 months after radiotherapy). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 19 Sep 2024.