Protocol of the Australasian Malignant Pleural Effusion (AMPLE) trial: a multicentre randomised study comparing indwelling pleural catheter versus talc pleurodesis

Edward T H Fysh, Rajesh Thomas, Catherine A Read, Ben C H Kwan, Elaine Yap, Fiona C Horwood, Pyng Lee, Francesco Piccolo, Ranjan Shrestha, Luke A Garske, David C L Lam, Andrew Rosenstengel, Michael Bint, Kevin Murray, Nicola A Smith, Y C Gary Lee, Edward T H Fysh, Rajesh Thomas, Catherine A Read, Ben C H Kwan, Elaine Yap, Fiona C Horwood, Pyng Lee, Francesco Piccolo, Ranjan Shrestha, Luke A Garske, David C L Lam, Andrew Rosenstengel, Michael Bint, Kevin Murray, Nicola A Smith, Y C Gary Lee

Abstract

Introduction: Malignant pleural effusion can complicate most cancers. It causes breathlessness and requires hospitalisation for invasive pleural drainages. Malignant effusions often herald advanced cancers and limited prognosis. Minimising time spent in hospital is of high priority to patients and their families. Various treatment strategies exist for the management of malignant effusions, though there is no consensus governing the best choice. Talc pleurodesis is the conventional management but requires hospitalisation (and substantial healthcare resources), can cause significant side effects, and has a suboptimal success rate. Indwelling pleural catheters (IPCs) allow ambulatory fluid drainage without hospitalisation, and are increasingly employed for management of malignant effusions. Previous studies have only investigated the length of hospital care immediately related to IPC insertion. Whether IPC management reduces time spent in hospital in the patients' remaining lifespan is unknown. A strategy of malignant effusion management that reduces hospital admission days will allow patients to spend more time outside hospital, reduce costs and save healthcare resources.

Methods and analysis: The Australasian Malignant Pleural Effusion (AMPLE) trial is a multicentred, randomised trial designed to compare IPC with talc pleurodesis for the management of malignant pleural effusion. This study will randomise 146 adults with malignant pleural effusions (1:1) to IPC management or talc slurry pleurodesis. The primary end point is the total number of days spent in hospital (for any admissions) from treatment procedure to death or end of study follow-up. Secondary end points include hospital days specific to pleural effusion management, adverse events, self-reported symptom and quality-of-life scores.

Ethics and dissemination: The Sir Charles Gairdner Group Human Research Ethics Committee has approved the study as have the ethics boards of all the participating hospitals. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at scientific conferences.

Trial registration numbers: Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry-ACTRN12611000567921; National Institutes of Health-NCT02045121.

Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Study flow chart (IPC, indwelling pleural catheter; CXR, chest X-ray).
Figure 2
Figure 2
Statistical analysis plan (IPC, indwelling pleural catheter).

References

    1. Light RW, Lee YC, eds. Textbook of pleural diseases. London, UK: Hodder Arnold, 2008.
    1. Mishra E, Davies HE, Lee YC. Malignant pleural disease in primary lung cancer. In: Spiro SG, Huber RM, Janes SM, eds. European respiratory society monograph. European Respiratory Society Journals Ltd, 2009:318–35.
    1. West SD, Lee YC. Management of malignant pleural mesothelioma. Clin Chest Med 2006;27:335–54.
    1. Heffner JE, Nietert PJ, Barbieri C. Pleural fluid pH as a predictor of pleurodesis failure: analysis of primary data. Chest 2000;117:87–95.
    1. American Thoracic Society. Management of malignant pleural effusions. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2000;162:1987–2001.
    1. Thomas R, Francis R, Davies HE et al. . Interventional therapies for malignant pleural effusions: the present and the future. Respirology 2014;19:809–22.
    1. Davies HE, Mishra EK, Kahan BC et al. . Effect of an indwelling pleural catheter vs chest tube and talc pleurodesis for relieving dyspnea in patients with malignant pleural effusion: the time2 randomized controlled trial. JAMA 2012;307:2383–9.
    1. Putnam JB Jr, Light RW, Rodriguez RM et al. . A randomized comparison of indwelling pleural catheter and doxycycline pleurodesis in the management of malignant pleural effusions. Cancer 1999;86:1992–9.
    1. Dresler CM, Olak J, Herndon JE II et al. . Phase iii intergroup study of talc poudrage vs talc slurry sclerosis for malignant pleural effusion. Chest 2005;127:909–15.
    1. Fysh ET, Tan SK, Read CA et al. . Pleurodesis outcome in malignant pleural mesothelioma. Thorax 2013;68:594–6.
    1. Davies HE, Lee YC. Management of malignant pleural effusions: questions that need answers. Curr Opin Pulm Med 2013;19:374–9.
    1. Maskell NA, Lee YC, Gleeson FV et al. . Randomized trials describing lung inflammation after pleurodesis with talc of varying particle size. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004;170:377–82.
    1. Azzopardi M, Porcel JM, Koegelenberg CFN et al. . Controversies in diagnosis and management of malignant pleural effusion. Semin Respir Crit Care Med 2015; In press.
    1. Lee YC, Fysh ET. Indwelling pleural catheter: changing the paradigm of malignant effusion management. J Thorac Oncol 2011;6:655–7.
    1. Tremblay A, Michaud G. Single-center experience with 250 tunnelled pleural catheter insertions for malignant pleural effusion. Chest 2006;129:362–8.
    1. Demmy TL, Gu L, Burkhalter JE et al. . Optimal management of malignant pleural effusions (results of calgb 30102). J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2012;10:975–82.
    1. Fysh ET, Waterer GW, Kendall PA et al. . Indwelling pleural catheters reduce inpatient days over pleurodesis for malignant pleural effusion. Chest 2012;142:394–400.
    1. Hunt BM, Farivar AS, Vallieres E et al. . Thoracoscopic talc versus tunneled pleural catheters for palliation of malignant pleural effusions. Ann Thorac Surg 2012;94:1053–7; discussion 1057–1059.
    1. Tremblay A, Mason C, Michaud G. Use of tunnelled catheters for malignant pleural effusions in patients fit for pleurodesis. Eur Respir J 2007;30:759–62.
    1. Fysh ET, Tremblay A, Feller-Kopman D et al. . Clinical outcomes of indwelling pleural catheter-related pleural infections: an international multicenter study. Chest 2013;144:1597–602.
    1. Thomas R, Budgeon CA, Kuok YJ et al. . Catheter tract metastasis associated with indwelling pleural catheters. Chest 2014;146:557–62.
    1. Clive AO, Kahan BC, Hooper CE et al. . Predicting survival in malignant pleural effusion: development and validation of the lent prognostic score. Thorax 2014. Published Online First. doi:10.1136/thoraxjnl-2014-205285.
    1. McPherson GC, Campbell MK, Elbourne DR. Investigating the relationship between predictability and imbalance in minimisation: a simulation study. Trials 2013;14:86.
    1. Lee YC, Baumann MH, Maskell NA et al. . Pleurodesis practice for malignant pleural effusions in five English-speaking countries: survey of pulmonologists. Chest 2003;124:2229–38.
    1. Boshuizen RC, Thomas R, Lee YC. Advantages of indwelling pleural catheters for management of malignant pleural effusions. Curr Respir Care Rep 2013;2:93–9.

Source: PubMed

Szponzorok és közreműködők

Egészségi állapot

Kábítószer-beavatkozások

3
Iratkozz fel