Skip to content

Proton Radiotherapy Versus Radiofrequency Ablation for Patients With Medium or Large Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Proton Beam Radiotherapy Versus Switching Control Radiofrequency Ablation for Patients With Medium (>3, ≦5 cm) or Large (>5, ≦7cm) Treatment-naive Hepatocellular Carcinoma

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT02640924
Enrollment
166
Registered
2015-12-29
Start date
2016-01-31
Completion date
2021-12-31
Last updated
2016-03-21

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

Conditions

Carcinoma, Hepatocellular

Keywords

Hepatocellular carcinoma, Proton therapy, Radiation therapy, Switching control radiofrequency ablation

Brief summary

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is one of the most common cancers in Taiwan, where chronic viral hepatitis is common. Patients with HCC typically have impaired liver function because of virus- or alcohol- induced cirrhosis and viral hepatitis, and only approximately 20% of them are appropriate candidates for surgery. The 5-year overall survival for patients treated by surgery is approximately 30%-70%. For those not treated with surgery, liver function affected by an underlying liver disease has a strong influence on clinical outcomes, and complicates treatment strategies further than for other tumors. Maximal preservation of normal liver volume and function is an important consideration in the choice of treatment. Proton beam has been applied to HCC treatment in Japan for longer than a decade, and several retrospective results showed excellent 3-5 years local control rate ranging from 85-95% and nearly no major complications. The investigators also retrospectively reviewed 75 index tumors sized 3.1-7.0cm in 70 patients receiving multiple-electrode radiofrequency ablation with switching controller (ME-SWC RFA) treatments in the period between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2011 (Oral report in Taiwan Digestive Disease Week, October, 2012). Estimated 1-, 2-, and 3-year cumulative overall survival rates and local control rates were 94%, 85%, 81% and 89%, 83%, 67%, respectively. Since ME-SWC RFA is the present one of standard modalities for non-surgery, moderate to larger (3-7 cm) HCC, and based on retrospective studies the local control rate of proton therapy was better than radiofrequency ablation, this prospective trial is aimed to compare the effects of these two modalities in 3-7 cm HCC patients who are not candidates for surgery or refuse surgery. This prospective study has high possibility to confirm the role of proton beam in HCC. Along with the clinical trial, the investigators will also use next generation sequencing (NGS) to exam gene expression profile of tumor samples and find out candidate genes related to local control, intrahepatic control (treatment out-field control in liver), regional lymph node relapse, distant metastasis, and treatment response in HCC.

Interventions

PROCEDURERadiofrequency Ablation

Sponsors

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
20 Years to 85 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Pathologically confirmed hepatocellular carcinoma or lesion with typical triphasic CT or MRI imaging features for HCC * Single tumor and tumor size \> 3cm, ≦7cm in diameter * Patients are unsuitable for resection or unwilling to accept surgery. * Age ≥20 years old * Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1 * Child-Pugh score ≦ 8 * Willing to sign informed consent regarding participation in this study

Exclusion criteria

* Patients have received any treatment for HCC before this study * Pregnancy/breast feeding women * Tumor adjacent to bowel \<1cm * Extrahepatic metastasis * Extrahepatic invasion * Portal or hepatic vein tumor invasion/thrombosis * Uncontrolled ascites * Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) \< 30 ml/min\* * Platelet count \< 50,000/L\* * Prior invasive malignancy (except non-melanomatous skin cancer) unless disease free for a minimum of 5 years * Ongoing medically significant active infection. * MRI incompatible devices * \* Baseline laboratories results must be within the protocol range prior to sign informed consent. Repeat lab tests are permitted to evaluate eligibility during the Screening Period.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frame
Local control rate (treatment in-field control rate)3-year

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Local control rate (treatment in-field control rate)5-year
Number of participants with treatment-related adverse events as assessed by CTCAE v4.03-year
Overall survival rate3-year
Intrahepatic control rate3-year
Patient report outcome - quality of life as assessed by the functional assessment of cancer therapy - hepatobiliary (FACT-Hep)3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.
Distant metastasis free survival rate3-year
Patient report outcome - pain as assessed by the brief pain inventory-short form (BPI-SF)3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.
Patient report outcome - symptom distress as assessed by the Memorial symptom assessment scale-short form (MSAS-SF)3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.
Patient report outcome - treatment satisfaction as assessed by the functional assessment of chronic illness therapy-treatment satisfaction-general (FACIT-TS-G)3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.
Patient report outcome - quality of life as assessed by the EQ-5D-3L3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.
Patient report outcome - fatigue as assessed by the functional assessment of cancer therapy (FACT-F)3-yearThe data will be collected 17 times from enrollment to the 36th month after treatment. Specific measurement points are: baseline, day 3, day 7, day 14, month 1, month 3, then every 3 months to the 36th month after treatment.

Countries

Taiwan

Contacts

Primary ContactBing-Shen Huang, MD
beanson.tw@gmail.com+886-3-3281200

Outcome results

None listed

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