Renal Cancer
Conditions
Keywords
ablation, quality of Life (QOL), kidney, registry, Ablation of Renal Masses Outcomes Registry (ARMOR), 13-116
Brief summary
The purpose of this study is to better understand how effective ablation is for destroying tumor cells in the kidney and whether quality of life is improved for patients. Participation in ARMOR may involve retrospective data collection only, combined retrospective and prospective data collection, or prospective data collection
Interventions
BEHAVIORAL(EORTC QLQ-C30) questionnaire
BEHAVIORALEuroQol EQ-5D 7-item questionnaire
Sponsors
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Rhode Island Hospital
M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
University of California, San Francisco
Thomas Jefferson University
Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute
Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai
University of Maryland, Baltimore County
Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
San Diego Imaging Medical Group
Hospital Sirio-Libanes
University Hospital, Bordeaux
University of California, Los Angeles
Study design
Observational model
COHORT
Time perspective
OTHER
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
Retrospective enrollment: \- Patients having undergone percutaneous, open or laparoscopic energy ablation of a renal mass. Prospective enrollment: \- Patients scheduled to undergo, rather than having undergone, percutaneous, open or laparoscopic energy ablation of a renal mass.
Exclusion criteria
* Patients not having undergone, or considered candidates for percutaneous, open or laparoscopic energy ablation of a renal mass * Non-English speaking patients * Patients under the age of 18.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| assess renal ablation outcomes | 5 years | To assess renal ablation outcomes using standard quality of life measures. Specifically, quality of life outcomes measures will be analyzed with respect to ablation procedure characteristics including ablation technique and anesthesia type as well as renal mass characteristics such as size, location and pathologic tumor type. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| differences in imaging characteristics | 5 years | between CT and MR related to renal ablation. We hypothesize that, after ablation, the observed relative change in contrast enhancement at the site of ablation for each follow-up time point will be similar for tumors imaged by CT compared with those imaged by MR. This objective will be met by observational and descriptive methods. |
| Assess the progression of imaging findings | 5 years | in terms of size and contrast enhancement at the site of renal ablation, correlated with ablation technology and tumor histopathology. The objective is to determine whether the choice of imaging method, ablation technique, or histopathologic tumor subtype will be associated with similar relative change in contrast enhancement and size after ablation. |
| Radiation exposure | 5 years | associated with CT imaging performed during an ablation procedure and subsequent imaging follow-up to 2 years. Radiation dose will be analyzed using multivariable linear regression, with ablation technique as the primary predictor. |
Countries
United States
Contacts
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORFourat Ridouani, MD
Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Outcome results
None listed