Evaluation of the Ability of CT-based Finite Element Analysis (CTFEA) to Predict Fractures in Patients With Metastases: a Randomized Controlled Study. (ZYCTFEA)
Study Overview
Status
Status
Conditions
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Intervention / Treatment
Study Type
Study Type
Enrollment (Anticipated)
Enrollment
Phase
Phase
- Not Applicable
Contacts and Locations
Study Contact
Study Contact
- Name: Haggai Schermann, MD
- Phone Number: +972 0528771014
- Email: sheralmi@bu.edu
Study Contact Backup
- Name: Amir Sternheim, MD
- Email: amirst@tlvmc.gov.il
Participation Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Genders Eligible for Study
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Metastatic bone disease of femur
- Patients who undergo a CT scan (soft tissue kernel/filter, 120 kVp), and have at least 2/3 of both femurs visible in the CT scan. If CT scan is performed at the Sourasky medical center it must be according to the protocol in Appendix A.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Ipsilateral previous surgery with or without implants
- Low quality CT scan or CT does not include at least 2/3 of the femurs.
- History of fractures, radiation or surgeries in lower limbs.
- Inability to provide informed consent
Study Plan
How is the study designed?
Design Details
- Primary Purpose: Prevention
- Allocation: Randomized
- Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
- Masking: None (Open Label)
Number of Arms
Arms and Interventions
Participant Group / ArmParticipant Group / Arm |
Intervention / TreatmentIntervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Experimental: CTFEA
Decision on preventive surgery vs follow-up will be based on expert judgement, Mirels' score and CTFEA
|
CT scans are used to generate a finite element model of patient-specific long bones.
The bone model is loaded in stance position.
Load based on patient's weight and the mechanical response, including the risk of fracture, is computed.
Other Names:
|
|
Other: Mirels
Decision on preventive surgery vs follow-up will be based on expert judgement and Mirels' score
|
Decision on surgery vs follow-up will be based on expert opinion and Mirels' score
Other Names:
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Primary efficacy hypothesis
Time Frame: four years
|
To compare proportion of patients undergoing surgery in the treatment group vs the control group.
|
four years
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Composite endpoint
Time Frame: 4 months
|
pathological fracture during 4 months of follow up OR death within 30 days after prophylactic surgery in patients who underwent surgery OR surgical complications within 4 months of follow up: infection, re-operation, mechanical failure
|
4 months
|
Other Outcome Measures
Other Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
All-cause mortality
Time Frame: 4 years
|
All-cause mortality
|
4 years
|
|
Number of patients who became unable to ambulate
Time Frame: 4 years
|
Number of patients who became unable to ambulate for any reason.
Inability to ambulate will be determined by an orthopedic surgeon from anamnesis and physical examination.
|
4 years
|
|
Number of participants who sustained a pathological fracture
Time Frame: 4 months
|
Number of participants who sustained a pathological fracture.
Diagnosis of pathological fracture will be determined by an orthopedic surgeon based on imaging.
|
4 months
|
|
Death
Time Frame: 30 days
|
Death within 30 days after prophylactic surgery
|
30 days
|
|
Surgical complications
Time Frame: 4 months
|
Infection, re-operation, mechanical failure within 4 months of follow up
|
4 months
|
|
Number of surgeries avoided
Time Frame: 4 months
|
The number of surgeries "avoided" - presented only in the group of Intervention and only in patients without the safety endpoint within 4 months of follow up.
Specifically, number of patients without the safety endpoint in whom a physician changed his/her decision to operate based on the CT-based FE analysis.
|
4 months
|
|
Agreement of two measures of fracture risk
Time Frame: One week
|
Agreement between the pathological fracture risk estimated using Mirels' scale and the pathological fracture risk CT-based FE simulation analysis.
Risk levels determined by either of the estimates: low, medium, high
|
One week
|
|
Patients who denied surgery
Time Frame: 4 months
|
Number of patients who did not undergo a prophylactic surgery, in whom the CT-based FE analysis showed a risk above moderate for fractures in future and who developed a fracture during the 4 months of follow-up - calculated in both study groups.
|
4 months
|
|
Complications that could be prevented by CTFEA
Time Frame: One month
|
Number of patients who underwent a prophylactic surgery, in whom the CT-based FE analysis showed a mild-moderate risk of a fracture and who devel-oped a complication (as defined in a composite safety endpoint) - calculated in both study groups
|
One month
|
Collaborators and Investigators
Sponsor
Sponsor
Investigators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Amir Sternheim, MD, Tel-Aviv Sourasky Medical Center
Publications and helpful links
General Publications
- Bickels J, Dadia S, Lidar Z. Surgical management of metastatic bone disease. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2009 Jun;91(6):1503-16. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.H.00175.
- Mirels H. Metastatic disease in long bones. A proposed scoring system for diagnosing impending pathologic fractures. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1989 Dec;(249):256-64.
- Goodheart JR, Cleary RJ, Damron TA, Mann KA. Simulating activities of daily living with finite element analysis improves fracture prediction for patients with metastatic femoral lesions. J Orthop Res. 2015 Aug;33(8):1226-34. doi: 10.1002/jor.22887. Epub 2015 May 21.
- Yosibash Z, Trabelsi N, Milgrom C. Reliable simulations of the human proximal femur by high-order finite element analysis validated by experimental observations. J Biomech. 2007;40(16):3688-99. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2007.06.017. Epub 2007 Aug 13.
- Trabelsi N, Yosibash Z, Wutte C, Augat P, Eberle S. Patient-specific finite element analysis of the human femur--a double-blinded biomechanical validation. J Biomech. 2011 Jun 3;44(9):1666-72. doi: 10.1016/j.jbiomech.2011.03.024. Epub 2011 Apr 15. Erratum In: J Biomech. 2012 Feb 23;45(4):724-5.
- Yosibash Z, Plitman Mayo R, Dahan G, Trabelsi N, Amir G, Milgrom C. Predicting the stiffness and strength of human femurs with real metastatic tumors. Bone. 2014 Dec;69:180-90. doi: 10.1016/j.bone.2014.09.022. Epub 2014 Oct 2.
- Benca E, Patsch JM, Mayr W, Pahr DH, Windhager R. The insufficiencies of risk analysis of impending pathological fractures in patients with femoral metastases: A literature review. Bone Rep. 2016 Mar 2;5:51-56. doi: 10.1016/j.bonr.2016.02.003. eCollection 2016 Dec.
- Nazarian A, Entezari V, Zurakowski D, Calderon N, Hipp JA, Villa-Camacho JC, Lin PP, Cheung FH, Aboulafia AJ, Turcotte R, Anderson ME, Gebhardt MC, Cheng EY, Terek RM, Yaszemski M, Damron TA, Snyder BD. Treatment Planning and Fracture Prediction in Patients with Skeletal Metastasis with CT-Based Rigidity Analysis. Clin Cancer Res. 2015 Jun 1;21(11):2514-9. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-14-2668. Epub 2015 Feb 27.
Study record dates
Study Major Dates
Study Start (Anticipated)
Study Start
Primary Completion (Anticipated)
Primary Completion
Study Completion (Anticipated)
Study Completion
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
First Submitted
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
First Posted (Actual)
First Posted
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Actual)
Last Update Posted
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
Last Verified
Last Verified
More Information
Terms related to this study
Keywords
Additional Relevant MeSH Terms
Other Study ID Numbers
Other Study ID Numbers
- 0532-17-TLV
Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)
Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?
IPD Plan Description
Drug and device information, study documents
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product
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 Bone Metastases
-
NCT04635137Not yet recruitingBone Metastases | Spine Metastases | Bone Lesion
-
NCT07202273Recruiting
-
NCT07538024Recruiting
-
NCT06380881CompletedPatients With Bone Metastases
-
NCT04859569RecruitingBone Metastases From Solid Tumors
-
NCT04630522CompletedBone Metastases From Solid Tumors
-
NCT05524064Active, not recruitingBone Metastases in the Thorax
-
NCT02356497Recruiting