Denna sida har översatts automatiskt och översättningens korrekthet kan inte garanteras. Vänligen se engelsk version för en källtext.

Randomized Comparison of Low and Conventional Irradiance PDT for Skin Cancer

12 december 2018 uppdaterad av: Sally Ibbotson

A Randomized Assessor-blinded Comparison of Low Irradiance and Conventional Irradiance Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) for Superficial Non-melanoma Skin Cancer

This study aims to examine whether the pain of topical photodynamic therapy (PDT) is significantly different when using low irradiance ambulatory light emitting diode (LED) devices compared with conventional higher irradiance hospital based LED light sources when used for superficial non-melanoma skin cancer. The investigators are also investigating the phototoxicity and efficacy of each regime in this randomized assessor-blinded clinical trial.

Studieöversikt

Status

Avslutad

Intervention / Behandling

Detaljerad beskrivning

A randomized assessor-blinded comparative study of low irradiance ambulatory LED devices with conventional hospital-based LED devices for superficial non-melanoma skin cancer. Preliminary observations suggest that low irradiance LEDs cause less pain but are as effective, so the investigators are examining this in a clinical trial of patients with lesions </= 2cm diameter of non-melanoma skin cancer (Bowen's disease and superficial basal cell carcinoma). Patients with these conditions referred to the PDT clinic will be invited to participate and if they are eligible and consent to treatment then they will be prospectively randomized to either ambulatory PDT or conventional PDT. Pain and phototoxicity scores will be recorded and clinical efficacy will be assessed up to one year after the last treatment. Computer-generated block randomization will be performed and at 90% power to detect as significant at the 5% level a mean difference in pain score of 2 in one group compared with 4 in the other, 36 patients will be needed, and as the participants will often be elderly and frail the investigators will aim for a safety margin of recruiting 50 participants to account for drop-outs. Participants will receive two treatments of either arm at a one week interval and will be assessed clinically at three months and if residual disease remains then the two treatments a week apart are repeated. Pain assessed using a visual analogue scale (VAS) score and phototoxicity on a semi-quantitative scale are recorded at 7 days when the participant returns for their second treatment. Follow up for clinical assessment is at 6 months and one year after treatment. Participants also give their opinion of treatment at one year follow up. Assessors of adverse effects and efficacy will be blinded. Data recording and analysis will be undertaken by the study statistician Dr Robert Dawe and analysis will be on an intention to treat basis using appropriate statistical tests comparing the pre-planned outcome measures, with pain as primary outcome and outcome, efficacy and patient satisfaction as secondary outcomes

Studietyp

Interventionell

Inskrivning (Faktisk)

50

Fas

  • Inte tillämpbar

Deltagandekriterier

Forskare letar efter personer som passar en viss beskrivning, så kallade behörighetskriterier. Några exempel på dessa kriterier är en persons allmänna hälsotillstånd eller tidigare behandlingar.

Urvalskriterier

Åldrar som är berättigade till studier

  • Barn
  • Vuxen
  • Äldre vuxen

Tar emot friska volontärer

Nej

Kön som är behöriga för studier

Allt

Beskrivning

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Bowen's disease or superficial basal cell carcinoma referred for PDT and lesion not greater than 2.4cm diameter

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Unable to give consent, >2cm diameter, lesions on highly curved surfaces where ambulatory device would not adhere

Studieplan

Det här avsnittet ger detaljer om studieplanen, inklusive hur studien är utformad och vad studien mäter.

Hur är studien utformad?

Designdetaljer

  • Primärt syfte: Behandling
  • Tilldelning: Randomiserad
  • Interventionsmodell: Parallellt uppdrag
  • Maskning: Enda

Vapen och interventioner

Deltagargrupp / Arm
Intervention / Behandling
Aktiv komparator: low irradiance LED PDT
Ambulight LED portable PDT treatment
battery-operated low irradiance red light LED ("skin cancer plaster")
Aktiv komparator: conventional higher irradiance LED
Conventional LED hospital based standard PDT treatment
battery-operated low irradiance red light LED ("skin cancer plaster")

Vad mäter studien?

Primära resultatmått

Resultatmått
Åtgärdsbeskrivning
Tidsram
Pain on VAS Score
Tidsram: one week after treatment
assess on visual analogue scale (VAS) score of 0 - 10cm, with 0 representing no pain experienced through to 10 representing the worst pain imaginable. The participant marks across a 0-10cm unmarked line where their level of pain experience is and this is measured eg. 2cm if experiencing mild pain or 8.5cm which would represent severe pain
one week after treatment

Sekundära resultatmått

Resultatmått
Åtgärdsbeskrivning
Tidsram
Phototoxicity
Tidsram: one week after treatment

erythema, oedema, blistering, crusting, ulceration on semi-quantitative scale. Erythema is graded as 0 = absent, 1 = mild, 2 = moderate or 3 = severe erythema as assessed by naked eye examination. Oedema is graded as 0 = absent or 1 = present. Likewise crusting or ulceration are each graded as 0 = absent and 1 = present by naked eye examination. Data will be presented and analysed separately ie. erythema data will be presented and then separately whether oedema, crusting or ulceration are present or absent.

ie. reporting may appear as example: erythema score 3 of range of 0-3 options; oedema score 1 (binary option of 0 or 1); crusting score 0 (binary option of 0 or 1); ulceration score 0 (binary option of 0 or 1)

one week after treatment
Clinical Clearance of Lesion
Tidsram: 12 months after treatment
clinical assessment by study dermatologist to determine by inspection and palpation whether the lesion is clear, partially clear or not clear - assessed at 3, 6 and 12 months after treatment, with 12 months as the final study outcome endpoint analysed
12 months after treatment
Patient Satisfaction
Tidsram: one year after treatment - last visit

brief patient questionnaire to evaluate their opinion of the treatment they received. This is assessed as A.efficacy of treatment - 1 = not effective NR; 2 = partIally effective PR; 3 = completely effective CR; B.Side effects of treatment eg. pain and inflammation - 1 = severe; 2 = moderate; 3 = mild; 4 = none/minimal. C.Practicalities of treatment eg. ease of use, travel, time, inconvenience - 1 = very disruptive and difficult; 2 = moderately disruptive and difficult; 3 = minimally disruptive and difficult. The scores of A, B and C will be added to give an overall score with range of overall minimum score option 3 and maximum 10.

Patients will also separately be asked to give overall evaluation on a VAS scale of 0 = treatment very poor and would not have again through to 10 = treatment excellent and I would have again - with a continuous line option from 0 - 10 to mark across, providing a separate score with range options 0 to 10

one year after treatment - last visit

Samarbetspartners och utredare

Det är här du hittar personer och organisationer som är involverade i denna studie.

Sponsor

Utredare

  • Huvudutredare: Sally H Ibbotson, MD, University of Dundee

Publikationer och användbara länkar

Den som ansvarar för att lägga in information om studien tillhandahåller frivilligt dessa publikationer. Dessa kan handla om allt som har med studien att göra.

Studieavstämningsdatum

Dessa datum spårar framstegen för inlämningar av studieposter och sammanfattande resultat till ClinicalTrials.gov. Studieposter och rapporterade resultat granskas av National Library of Medicine (NLM) för att säkerställa att de uppfyller specifika kvalitetskontrollstandarder innan de publiceras på den offentliga webbplatsen.

Studera stora datum

Studiestart

1 oktober 2011

Primärt slutförande (Faktisk)

6 februari 2017

Avslutad studie (Faktisk)

6 februari 2017

Studieregistreringsdatum

Först inskickad

5 augusti 2016

Först inskickad som uppfyllde QC-kriterierna

15 augusti 2016

Första postat (Uppskatta)

19 augusti 2016

Uppdateringar av studier

Senaste uppdatering publicerad (Faktisk)

4 januari 2019

Senaste inskickade uppdateringen som uppfyllde QC-kriterierna

12 december 2018

Senast verifierad

1 december 2018

Mer information

Termer relaterade till denna studie

Andra studie-ID-nummer

  • 2011DS04

Plan för individuella deltagardata (IPD)

Planerar du att dela individuella deltagardata (IPD)?

Ja

IPD-planbeskrivning

peer reviewed publications and presentations at international and national meetings

Tidsram för IPD-delning

presenting study data at British Association of Dermatologists annual meeting Edinburgh 5.7.18 and abstract will be published in Br J Dermatol and full publication will follow

Kriterier för IPD Sharing Access

via presentation and publication in peer-reviewed journal

IPD-delning som stöder informationstyp

  • Studieprotokoll
  • Statistisk analysplan (SAP)
  • Informerat samtycke (ICF)
  • Klinisk studierapport (CSR)

Denna information hämtades direkt från webbplatsen clinicaltrials.gov utan några ändringar. Om du har några önskemål om att ändra, ta bort eller uppdatera dina studieuppgifter, vänligen kontakta register@clinicaltrials.gov. Så snart en ändring har implementerats på clinicaltrials.gov, kommer denna att uppdateras automatiskt även på vår webbplats .

Prenumerera