此页面是自动翻译的,不保证翻译的准确性。请参阅 英文版 对于源文本。

Randomized Comparison of Low and Conventional Irradiance PDT for Skin Cancer

2018年12月12日 更新者: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.

研究概览

详细说明

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

研究类型

介入性

注册 (实际的)

50

阶段

  • 不适用

参与标准

研究人员寻找符合特定描述的人,称为资格标准。这些标准的一些例子是一个人的一般健康状况或先前的治疗。

资格标准

适合学习的年龄

  • 孩子
  • 成人
  • 年长者

接受健康志愿者

不

有资格学习的性别

全部

描述

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

学习计划

本节提供研究计划的详细信息,包括研究的设计方式和研究的衡量标准。

研究是如何设计的?

设计细节

  • 主要用途:治疗
  • 分配:随机化
  • 介入模型:并行分配
  • 屏蔽:单身的

武器和干预

参与者组/臂
干预/治疗
有源比较器:low irradiance LED PDT
Ambulight LED portable PDT treatment
battery-operated low irradiance red light LED ("skin cancer plaster")
有源比较器:conventional higher irradiance LED
Conventional LED hospital based standard PDT treatment
battery-operated low irradiance red light LED ("skin cancer plaster")

研究衡量的是什么?

主要结果指标

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Pain on VAS Score
大体时间: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

次要结果测量

结果测量
措施说明
大体时间
Phototoxicity
大体时间: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
大体时间: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
大体时间: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

合作者和调查者

在这里您可以找到参与这项研究的人员和组织。

调查人员

  • 首席研究员:Sally H Ibbotson, MD、University of Dundee

出版物和有用的链接

负责输入研究信息的人员自愿提供这些出版物。这些可能与研究有关。

研究记录日期

这些日期跟踪向 ClinicalTrials.gov 提交研究记录和摘要结果的进度。研究记录和报告的结果由国家医学图书馆 (NLM) 审查,以确保它们在发布到公共网站之前符合特定的质量控制标准。

研究主要日期

学习开始

2011年10月1日

初级完成 (实际的)

2017年2月6日

研究完成 (实际的)

2017年2月6日

研究注册日期

首次提交

2016年8月5日

首先提交符合 QC 标准的

2016年8月15日

首次发布 (估计)

2016年8月19日

研究记录更新

最后更新发布 (实际的)

2019年1月4日

上次提交的符合 QC 标准的更新

2018年12月12日

最后验证

2018年12月1日

更多信息

与本研究相关的术语

其他研究编号

  • 2011DS04

计划个人参与者数据 (IPD)

计划共享个人参与者数据 (IPD)?

是的

IPD 计划说明

peer reviewed publications and presentations at international and national meetings

IPD 共享时间框架

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

IPD 共享访问标准

via presentation and publication in peer-reviewed journal

IPD 共享支持信息类型

  • 研究协议
  • 统计分析计划 (SAP)
  • 知情同意书 (ICF)
  • 临床研究报告(CSR)

此信息直接从 clinicaltrials.gov 网站检索,没有任何更改。如果您有任何更改、删除或更新研究详细信息的请求,请联系 register@clinicaltrials.gov. clinicaltrials.gov 上实施更改,我们的网站上也会自动更新.

订阅