Skip to content

Comparing Two Different Boost Approaches in Radiation Therapy for People With Prostate Cancer

Alternative Boost Approaches in Radiation Therapy IRreversible Electroporation Versus RADIAtioN BoosT for Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer (IRRADIANT)

Status
Recruiting
Phases
Phase 3
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT07548164
Enrollment
224
Registered
2026-04-23
Start date
2026-04-16
Completion date
2029-04-16
Last updated
2026-06-16

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

Conditions

Prostate Cancer

Keywords

intermediate-risk prostate cancer, prostate cancer, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 26-029

Brief summary

In this study the investigators will find out whether the use of a new type of boost approach called irreversible electroporation (IRE) is as effective as the standard boost approach of radiation therapy for participants with intermediate-risk prostate cancer receiving standard stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT).

Interventions

The NanoKnife System is the device that is used for Irreversible Electroporation/IRE. The NanoKnife Generator is a microprocessor-controlled low energy direct current (LEDC) irreversible electroporation device.

RADIATIONStereotactic Body Radiation Therapy

Radiation-based treatment intensification involves delivery of a boost to the dominant intraprostatic lesion (DIL) to a higher dose than the surrounding prostate tissue using external beam radiation therapy.

Sponsors

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
Lead SponsorOTHER
Angiodynamics, Inc.
CollaboratorINDUSTRY

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
MALE
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Biopsy proven grade group 2 or 3 (GS 3+4 or GS 4+3) cancer with all pattern 4 found only in the MRI target; systematic biopsy pattern 4 that is concordant with MRI target per investigator is permissible * Gland size ≤ 80 cc * Prostate MRI \< rT3b disease * IPSS \< 20 * No contraindication to IRE, RT, anesthesia, or transperineal procedure

Exclusion criteria

* Any Grade Group ≥4 disease, or any cribriform and/or intraductal carcinoma * Evidence of nodal or /metastatic disease on MRI and/or PSMA PET/CT * Unfit for general anesthesia, or contraindication/hypersensitivity to required neuromuscular blocking agents * Active urinary tract infection (UTI) at the time of IRE or biopsy; must be treated and resolved prior to proceeding * Actively bleeding, known bleeding disorder, or inability to interrupt anticoagulants/antiplatelet therapy as clinically indicated for biopsy/IRE safety * Any history of cardiac arrhythmia or epilepsy, or recent myocardial infarction, consistent with NanoKnife contraindication statements * Presence of an implanted pacemaker/defibrillator or other active implanted electronic device, or other device-related contraindications per current NanoKnife labeling/user manual * Inability to undergo pelvic MRI * Prior treatment of prostate cancer including androgen deprivation therapy, focal therapy, radiation therapy, or prostatectomy * Current or intended use of androgen deprivation therapy

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Biopsy negative rate at 2 years2 yearsThe primary objective is to demonstrate that Irreversible Electroporation/IRE boost is non-inferior with respect to negative biopsy rate at 2 years compared to Radiation Therapy/RT boost. This is measured by the two-year biopsy negative rate for the control group and the intervention group.

Countries

United States

Contacts

CONTACTHimanshu Nagar, MD
nagarh1@mskcc.org212-639-6478
CONTACTJonathan Fainberg, MD, MPH
fainberj@mskcc.org646-422-4894
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORHimanshu Nagar, MD

Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jun 17, 2026