Skip to content

Follow-Up Study Evaluating The Long Term Safety and Efficacy of BST-CarGel and Microfracture Repair of the Knee

Follow-up Study Evaluating The Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of BST-CarGel® and Microfracture In Repair of Focal Articular Cartilage Lesions on The Femoral Condyle (Extension Study of Protocols CG-CIP01-P & CG-CIP02-P)

Status
Completed
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Observational
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01246895
Enrollment
67
Registered
2010-11-24
Start date
2011-03-31
Completion date
2014-03-31
Last updated
2018-01-24

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Knee Injuries

Keywords

Cartilage repair, Cartilage, Knee, Knee Pain, Microfracture, Arthroscopy, Bone Marrow Stimulation, Chondrogenesis, Scaffold, Chitosan, Articular Cartilage Repair

Brief summary

This follow-up study will evaluate the effects of BST-CarGel® application to a microfractured lesion (investigational) and microfracture alone (control) for up to 5 years from treatment in subjects, treated under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P, and will serve as a post approval study for these Protocols, in support of a commercial application. The lesions treated under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P were focal lesions of articular cartilage, grade 3 or 4 (either ICRS or Outerbridge classification) on the medial and lateral femoral condyles of the knee, and were classified as either acute or chronic.

Detailed description

Cartilage repair currently remains a problematic orthopedic concern with no effective solution. The development of new surgical techniques or therapies is critical in meeting this medical need. Clinical data regarding the long-term durability of repair tissue resulting from cartilage repair techniques such as microfracture, autologous chondrocyte implantation or mosaicplasty is lacking. Only two studies, one comparative and one uncontrolled, have examined long-term repair outcomes (over 4 years). These studies reinforced the concept that further studies are needed to identify a technique or product that will lead to long-term clinical benefit through improved cartilage repair efficacy. BST-CarGel® is a medical device derived from chitosan applied to a microfractured lesion and has been shown to promote the quantity and quality of cartilage repair tissue in animals. The efficacy and safety of BST-CarGel® is currently being evaluated in humans as compared to the standard of care treatment, microfracture, in a 12 month international study in Canada, Europe and Korea under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P. When these protocols were designed and carried out, the BST-CarGel® technology belonged to BioSyntech Canada Inc. Afterwards, the technology was acquired by Piramal Healthcare (Canada) Ltd. which is now the owner of the technology and the sponsor for this Extension Study CG-C1P04. This follow-up study will evaluate the long-term effects (5 yrs) of BST-CarGel® + microfracture and microfracture alone in subjects treated in the pivotal and sub-studies. All eligible subjects (maximum 80) who were treated under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P and completed the required 12 month follow-up period will be asked to participate in this follow-up study. The stratification from Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P (investigational site and lesion type) will be retained for the purposes of the follow-up study, and all third parties such as the MRI central reading facility will remain blinded to the treatment received under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P. Comparisons between the two treatment groups will be performed. The following assessments will be done annually at years 3 and/or 4 and 5 post -treatment under Protocols CG-CIP01-P and CG-CIP02-P in subjects treated with BST-CarGel + microfracture or microfracture alone: 1. Analyses of tissue repair will be carried out based on the degree of lesion filling and quality of repair tissue using MRI 2. The general health status of subjects will be captured in the case report form (CRF) and will include the subject's overall health status, treated knee status, adverse events (AEs) and concomitant medications. 3. The assessment of the subject's knee pain, stiffness, functional ability and quality of life through self-assessment questionnaires (Western Ontario and McMaster Universities osteoarthritis index (WOMAC) and short-form-36 (SF-36v2)

Interventions

DEVICEMicrofracture with BST-CarGel

Sponsors

Piramal Healthcare Canada Ltd
Lead SponsorINDUSTRY

Study design

Observational model
CASE_CONTROL
Time perspective
PROSPECTIVE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 55 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* The subject was treated under Protocol CG-CIP01 or CG-CIP02 and completed 12 month follow-up period * The subject has understood and signed a Research Ethics Board(REB) approved Informed Consent Form (ICF)

Exclusion criteria

* The subject was not treated under Protocol CG-CIP01-P or CG-CIP02-P * The subject did not complete 12 month follow-up period

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at 5 Years Through MRI.5 yearsDegree of lesion filling (repair tissue volume) as measured by quantitative MRI at 5 Years post-treatment compared to the debrided lesion 1-month post-treatment (baseline).
Repair Tissue Quality (T2 MRI)5 yearsTissue quality of the repair tissue as measured by T2 MRI as an index for collagen-based structure.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)5 yearsThe three sub-scales: 1) Pain, 2.) stiffness and 3.) function scores ranged from 0-10. Pain had 5 items and stiffness had 2 items, and function had 17 items. The total score for pain ranged from 0 no pain to 50 worst pain. The total score for stiffness ranged from 0 no stiffness to 20 worst stiffness. The total score for function raged from 0 no function to 170 worst function. A higher score indicates a better health state improvement.
The Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 Years5 yearsSafety was assessed by recording the number of participants with Adverse Events (AEs) and their severity from the time of ICF signing up to 5 years post-treatment.

Other

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.1 and 5 yearsSF-36 v2 includes 2 aggregate measures-Physical and Mental components-derived from 8 subscales. Least squares means are adjusted for baseline. Higher positive scores indicate better results. Scoring ranges from 0 to 100%.

Countries

Canada, Spain

Participant flow

Recruitment details

All eligible subjects who were treated under Protocol CG-CIP01-P and completed the required 12-month follow-up period were asked to participate in this follow-up study. Ultimately, 67 subjects signed an ICF to enter the study and the screening process.

Participants by arm

ArmCount
Experimental
Microfracture with BST-CarGel
37
Control
Microfracture without BST-CarGel
30
Total67

Baseline characteristics

CharacteristicControlTotalExperimental
Age, Continuous40.1 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.1
36.8 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.2
34.3 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.7
Region of Enrollment
Canada
26 participants56 participants30 participants
Region of Enrollment
Spain
4 participants11 participants7 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Female
12 participants24 participants12 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Male
14 participants36 participants22 participants
Sex/Gender, Customized
Withdrew/Withdrawn
4 participants7 participants3 participants

Adverse events

Event typeEG000
affected / at risk
EG001
affected / at risk
deaths
Total, all-cause mortality
0 / 370 / 30
other
Total, other adverse events
2 / 373 / 30
serious
Total, serious adverse events
0 / 371 / 30

Outcome results

Primary

Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at 5 Years Through MRI.

Degree of lesion filling (repair tissue volume) as measured by quantitative MRI at 5 Years post-treatment compared to the debrided lesion 1-month post-treatment (baseline).

Time frame: 5 years

Population: 33 out of 34 BST-CarGel with percentage lesion filled measurement. 1 aberrant imaging datapoint from 1 patient out of 34 patients was removed from the Experimental group

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Microfracture + BST-CarGelDegree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at 5 Years Through MRI.93.79 Percentage of lesion filled (%)Standard Deviation 1.16
Microfracture AloneDegree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at Degree of Lesion Filling (%Fill) by Repair Tissue at 5 Years Through MRI.86.96 Percentage of lesion filled (%)Standard Deviation 2.85
p-value: 0.017general estimating equations (GEE)
Primary

Repair Tissue Quality (T2 MRI)

Tissue quality of the repair tissue as measured by T2 MRI as an index for collagen-based structure.

Time frame: 5 years

Population: 5 aberrant imaging datapoint from 5 patients out of 34 patients were removed from the Experimental group and 4 aberrant imaging datapoint from 4 patients out of 34 patients were removed from the Control group

ArmMeasureValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Microfracture + BST-CarGelRepair Tissue Quality (T2 MRI)75.68 T2 relaxation time (ms)Standard Deviation 5.25
Microfracture AloneRepair Tissue Quality (T2 MRI)90.41 T2 relaxation time (ms)Standard Deviation 6.56
p-value: 0.026general estimating equations (GEE)
Secondary

Percentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)

The three sub-scales: 1) Pain, 2.) stiffness and 3.) function scores ranged from 0-10. Pain had 5 items and stiffness had 2 items, and function had 17 items. The total score for pain ranged from 0 no pain to 50 worst pain. The total score for stiffness ranged from 0 no stiffness to 20 worst stiffness. The total score for function raged from 0 no function to 170 worst function. A higher score indicates a better health state improvement.

Time frame: 5 years

Population: 1 datapoint not made available from 1 patient out of 34 patients in the Experimental group

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Pain at 5 year-15.37 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 1.47
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Stiffness at 5 year-5.63 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 0.72
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Physical Function at 5 year-56.52 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 4.57
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Pain at 5 year-16.56 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 1.19
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Stiffness at 5 year-6.68 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 0.58
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change From Baseline for Knee-related Pain, Stiffness and Function at 5 Years (WOMAC Parts A, B, C)Physical Function at 5 year-62.10 Percentage changeStandard Deviation 3.43
Comparison: WOMAC subscale - Painp-value: 0.474general estimating equations (GEE)
Comparison: WOMAC subscale - Stiffnessp-value: 0.236general estimating equations (GEE)
Comparison: WOMAC subscale - Physical functionp-value: 0.326general estimating equations (GEE)
Secondary

The Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 Years

Safety was assessed by recording the number of participants with Adverse Events (AEs) and their severity from the time of ICF signing up to 5 years post-treatment.

Time frame: 5 years

Population: Participants who experienced adverse events

ArmMeasureGroupValue (NUMBER)
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with AE's13 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with unanticipated procedure-related1 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with anticipated procedure-related AE1 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with unanticipated device-related AEs1 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with anticipated device-related AEs0 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with serious adverse events SAEs1 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants discontinued from study because of an0 participants
Microfracture + BST-CarGelThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipant death over the 5-year follow up period0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipant death over the 5-year follow up period0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with AE's18 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with anticipated device-related AEs0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with unanticipated procedure-related0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants discontinued from study because of an0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with anticipated procedure-related AE2 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with serious adverse events SAEs0 participants
Microfracture AloneThe Number of Participants With Adverse Events Until 5 YearsParticipants with unanticipated device-related AEs0 participants
p-value: 0.01Physical count
Other Pre-specified

Percentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.

SF-36 v2 includes 2 aggregate measures-Physical and Mental components-derived from 8 subscales. Least squares means are adjusted for baseline. Higher positive scores indicate better results. Scoring ranges from 0 to 100%.

Time frame: 1 and 5 years

ArmMeasureGroupValue (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN)Dispersion
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Physical component - Year 113.01 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.43
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Physical component - Year 513.12 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.63
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Mental component - Year 13.38 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.42
Microfracture + BST-CarGelPercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Mental component - Year 52.72 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.3
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Mental component - Year 5-0.17 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.76
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Physical component - Year 114.37 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.35
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Mental component - Year 10.49 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.42
Microfracture AlonePercentage Change in Quality of Life Assessed Using the SF-36 Questionnaire.Physical component - Year 514.48 Percent change from baselineStandard Deviation 1.42
Comparison: SF-36 v2 Physical componentp-value: 0.478general estimating equations (GEE)
Comparison: SF-36 v2 Mental componentp-value: 0.125general estimating equations (GEE)

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026