Open Versus Robot Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Totally Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion.

January 18, 2023 updated by: Giuseppe SImone, Regina Elena Cancer Institute

Open Versus Robot Assisted Radical Cystectomy With Totally Intracorporeal Urinary Diversion. Single Centre Prospective Randomized Trial.

This prospective randomized study is designed to provide high level of evidence supporting superiority of robot assisted (RA) versus open (O) radical cystectomy (RC). The primary endpoint is a 50% reduction of transfusion rate, several perioperative outcomes potentially linked to a reduced invasiveness are considered as secondary endpoints. Investigators hypothesis is that the reduced invasiveness of RARC might turn into a higher adherence to enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols (early bowel recovery, reduced need for painkillers and insertion of nasogastric tube) and consequently to shorter hospital stay and to faster return to daily activities. These data will be taken into account in a matched cost analysis between arms. Secondary aims include a between arm matched comparison of perioperative complications, oncologic outcomes (2-yr disease free survival is an accepted surrogate of long term oncologic effectiveness of RC) and functional outcomes (daytime and nighttime continence).

Study Overview

Status

Status

Indicates the current recruitment status or the expanded access status.
Completed

Conditions

Conditions

The disease, disorder, syndrome, illness, or injury that is being studied. On ClinicalTrials.gov, conditions may also include other health-related issues, such as lifespan, quality of life, and health risks.

Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.

Detailed Description

Despite encouraging data deriving from colorectal surgery, evidences in favor to ERAS protocols following RARC are poor. Moreover, according to a recent survey of surgeons with a specialist interest in RC, the adherence to ERAS protocols is <20% [1].

Retrospective and preliminary data from the robotic consortium have supported oncologic effectiveness of RARC; however in the only prospective randomized trial comparing RARC and ORC urinary diversions were performed extracorporeally, potentially impairing the benefits of minimally invasive surgery [2].

Robot assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has the aim of providing adequate cancer control while minimizing invasiveness of open radical cystectomy (ORC). The primary end-point of this trial is to demonstrate a reduction of perioperative transfusion rate in RARC arm by 50% compared to ORC arm.

ERAS protocols may significantly contribute to shortening length of hospital stay, a key outcome in this clinical setting of patients receiving RC, being the mean length of hospital stay around 14 days in Italy. Investigators' hypothesis is that the reduced invasiveness of RARC might contribute to an increased adoption of ERAS protocols (reduced need for reinsertion of nasogastric tube, shorter time to first flatus, to mobilization, to regular diet and finally shorter duration of hospital stay).

Assessment of oncologic outcomes of RARC, although not the primary endpoint of the present study, is certainly an outcome of interest. The expected duration of enrollment (18 mo) should provide 2-yr oncologic outcomes for about 66% of patients. Two-year recurrence free survival has been reported as a valid surrogate marker of long term oncologic survival after RC.

Specific Aim 1:To demonstrate superiority of RARC versus ORC in terms of 50% reduction of perioperative transfusion rates.

Specific Aim 2:

To evaluate invasiveness of both surgical approaches by assessing the adherence to ERAS protocols in both and the incidence of perioperative and 30-d, 90d, 180d complications, readmission rates (30d, 90d). Cost analysis will assess the potential impact of shorter hospital stay on overall costs of robotic procedures.

Specific Aim 3:

To assess quality of life at 6-mo, 12-mo and 24-mo follow-up evaluation and to perform a matched comparison of oncologic and functional outcomes between two arms.

Study Type

Study Type

Describes the nature of a clinical study. Study types include interventional studies (also called clinical trials), observational studies (including patient registries), and expanded access.
Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

Enrollment

The number of participants in a clinical study. The "anticipated" enrollment is the target number of participants that the researchers need for the study.
116

Phase

Phase

The stage of a clinical trial studying a drug or biological product, based on definitions developed by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA). The phase is based on the study's objective, the number of participants, and other characteristics. There are five phases: Early Phase 1 (formerly listed as Phase 0), Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3, and Phase 4. Not Applicable is used to describe trials without FDA-defined phases, including trials of devices or behavioral interventions.
  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

  • Italy
    • Lazio
      • Rome, Lazio, Italy, 00144
        • Regina Elena NCI

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Eligibility Criteria

The key requirements that people who want to participate in a clinical study must meet or the characteristics they must have. Eligibility criteria consist of both inclusion criteria (which are required for a person to participate in the study) and exclusion criteria (which prevent a person from participating). Types of eligibility criteria include whether a study accepts healthy volunteers, has age or age group requirements, or is limited by sex.

Ages Eligible for Study

  • Child
  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with muscle invasive high grade urothelial carcinoma (and variant histologies) of the bladder or high grade non muscle invasive BCG recurrent/refractory disease.

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Cystectomy without curative intent (palliative, salvage).
  • Patients unfit for robotic cystectomy.

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Treatment
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: None (Open Label)

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm

Participant Group / Arm

A group or subgroup of participants in a clinical trial that receives a specific intervention/treatment, or no intervention, according to the trial's protocol.
Intervention / Treatment

Intervention / Treatment

A process or action that is the focus of a clinical study. Interventions include drugs, medical devices, procedures, vaccines, and other products that are either investigational or already available. Interventions can also include noninvasive approaches, such as education or modifying diet and exercise.
Active Comparator: Open Radical Cystectomy
Open Radical Cystectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection, urinary diversion (neobladder or ileal conduit)
Procedure: Open or robotic radical cystectomy

ORC and orthotopic ileal neobladder is performed as previously described. A separate package PLND is performed as in open as in robotic surgery. RARC is performed replicating open surgical procedure.

The orthotopic ileal neobladder model used is the 'vescica ileale padovana' as previously described. An ileal segment, approximately 42 cm long, is chosen at a minimum distance of 20cm far from ileo-cecal valve. A latero-lateral ileal anastomosis is performed with staplers to restore bowel continuity.

For ileal conduit, a 20cm ileal segment (approximately 20 cm long) at a minimum distance of 20 cm from ileo-cecal valve is isolated and transected with staplers. Bowel continuity is restored as previously described. The ileal loop on its distal edge is extracted through abdomen wall at the previously identified stoma point and fixed to abdomen fascia. The ureters are spatulated and a latero-lateral anastomosis according to Wallace 1 technique is performed.
Experimental: Robot assisted radical cystectomy
Robot assisted radical cystectomy, pelvic lymph node dissection, intracorporeal urinary diversion (neobladder or ileal conduit)
Procedure: Open or robotic radical cystectomy

ORC and orthotopic ileal neobladder is performed as previously described. A separate package PLND is performed as in open as in robotic surgery. RARC is performed replicating open surgical procedure.

The orthotopic ileal neobladder model used is the 'vescica ileale padovana' as previously described. An ileal segment, approximately 42 cm long, is chosen at a minimum distance of 20cm far from ileo-cecal valve. A latero-lateral ileal anastomosis is performed with staplers to restore bowel continuity.

For ileal conduit, a 20cm ileal segment (approximately 20 cm long) at a minimum distance of 20 cm from ileo-cecal valve is isolated and transected with staplers. Bowel continuity is restored as previously described. The ileal loop on its distal edge is extracted through abdomen wall at the previously identified stoma point and fixed to abdomen fascia. The ureters are spatulated and a latero-lateral anastomosis according to Wallace 1 technique is performed.

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, the planned outcome measure that is the most important for evaluating the effect of an intervention/treatment. Most clinical studies have one primary outcome measure, but some have more than one.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of participants requiring perioperative transfusions.
Time Frame: 30 days
50% reduction of perioperative transfusion rates in robotic arm.
30 days

Secondary Outcome Measures

Secondary Outcome Measures

In a clinical study's protocol, a planned outcome measure that is not as important as the primary outcome measure for evaluating the effect of an intervention but is still of interest. Most clinical studies have more than one secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of participants requiring insertion of nasogastric tube
Time Frame: 30 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
30 days
Incidence of Clavien grade 1-2 perioperative complications at 30-d evaluation.
Time Frame: 30 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
30 days
Incidence of Clavien grade 1-2 perioperative complications at 90-d evaluation.
Time Frame: 90 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
90 days
Incidence of Clavien grade 1-2 perioperative complications at 180-d evaluation.
Time Frame: 180 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
180 days
Incidence of patients requiring readmission.
Time Frame: 90 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
90 days
Cost analysis.
Time Frame: 30 days
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
30 days

Other Outcome Measures

Other Outcome Measures

For clinical trials, a planned measurement described in the protocol that is used to determine the effect of an intervention/treatment on participants. For observational studies, a measurement or observation that is used to describe patterns of diseases or traits, or associations with exposures, risk factors, or treatment. Types of outcome measures include primary outcome measure and secondary outcome measure.
Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Assessment of quality of life at 6-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-BLM30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
6 months
Assessment of quality of life at 6-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 6 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
6 months
Assessment of quality of life at 12-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-BLM30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 12 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
12 months
Assessment of quality of life at 12-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 12 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
12 months
Assessment of quality of life at 24-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-BLM30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
24 months
Assessment of quality of life at 24-mo follow-up with self-administered EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms.
24 months
Disease free survival
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robitic arms
24 months
Cancer specific survival
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robitic arms
24 months
Overall survival
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robitic arms
24 months
Assessment of urinary continence with pad test.
Time Frame: 12 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms
12 months
Assessment of urinary continence with pad test.
Time Frame: 24 months
Comparison between open and robotic arms
24 months

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

Sponsor

The organization or person who initiates the study and who has authority and control over the study.
Regina Elena Cancer Institute

Collaborators

Collaborators

An organization other than the sponsor that provides support for a clinical study. This support may include activities related to funding, design, implementation, data analysis, or reporting.
Ministero della Salute, Italy

Investigators

Investigators

A researcher involved in a clinical study. Related terms include site principal investigator, site sub-investigator, study chair, study director, and study principal investigator.
  • Principal Investigator: Giuseppe Simone, PhD, "Regina Elena" National Cancer Institute, Dept of Urology

Publications and helpful links

The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.

General Publications

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start (Actual)

Study Start

The actual date on which the first participant was enrolled in a clinical study. The "anticipated" study start date is the date that the researchers think will be the study start date.
January 29, 2018

Primary Completion (Actual)

Primary Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention to collect final data for the primary outcome measure. Whether the clinical study ended according to the protocol or was terminated does not affect this date. For clinical studies with more than one primary outcome measure with different completion dates, this term refers to the date on which data collection is completed for all the primary outcome measures. The "anticipated" primary completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the primary completion date for the study.
October 30, 2020

Study Completion (Actual)

Study Completion

The date on which the last participant in a clinical study was examined or received an intervention/treatment to collect final data for the primary outcome measures, secondary outcome measures, and adverse events (that is, the last participant's last visit). The "anticipated" study completion date is the date that the researchers think will be the study completion date.
September 30, 2022

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

First Submitted

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submitted a study record to ClinicalTrials.gov. There is typically a delay of a few days between the first submitted date and the record's availability on ClinicalTrials.gov (the first posted date).
January 26, 2018

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The date on which the study sponsor or investigator first submits a study record that is consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. The sponsor or investigator may need to revise and submit a study record one or more times before NLM's QC review criteria are met. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
February 8, 2018

First Posted (Actual)

First Posted

The date on which the study record was first available on ClinicalTrials.gov after National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review has concluded. There is typically a delay of a few days between the date the study sponsor or investigator submitted the study record and the first posted date.
February 15, 2018

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

Last Update Posted

The most recent date on which changes to a study record were made available on ClinicalTrials.gov. There may be a delay between when the changes were submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov by the study's sponsor or investigator (the last update submitted date) and the last update posted date.
January 19, 2023

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator submitted changes to a study record that are consistent with National Library of Medicine (NLM) quality control (QC) review criteria. It is the responsibility of the sponsor or investigator to ensure that the study record is consistent with the NLM QC review criteria.
January 18, 2023

Last Verified

Last Verified

The most recent date on which the study sponsor or investigator confirmed the information about a clinical study on ClinicalTrials.gov as accurate and current. If a study with a recruitment status of recruiting; not yet recruiting; or active, not recruiting has not been confirmed within the past 2 years, the study's recruitment status is shown as unknown.
January 1, 2023

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Additional Relevant MeSH Terms

Other Study ID Numbers

Other Study ID Numbers

Identifiers or ID numbers other than the NCT number that are assigned to a clinical study by the study's sponsor, funders, or others. These numbers may include unique identifiers from other trial registries and National Institutes of Health grant numbers.
  • GR2016-02364306

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

No

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Bladder Cancer

Clinical Trials on Open or robotic radical cystectomy

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Cookie Settings

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. For more details carefully read our Privacy and Cookies Policy. ...>>>You can change your preferences or withdraw your consent at any time by deleting the cookies from your website or computer as described in the policy. Please accept it and choose your preferences by ticking the corresponding boxes in the "Manage Settings" section below. Please carefully read our Terms of Service before you proceed with using any part of this website.
«Manage Settings