Clinical Trial Results:
“Technical and diagnostic performances of PET/CT with 64Cu(II)Cl2 in localization of metastases from prostate carcinoma, in patients undergoing restaging for disease progression during ADT”
Summary
|
|
EudraCT number |
2014-001158-41 |
Trial protocol |
IT |
Global end of trial date |
01 Apr 2017
|
Results information
|
|
Results version number |
v1(current) |
This version publication date |
11 Apr 2018
|
First version publication date |
11 Apr 2018
|
Other versions |
|
Summary report(s) |
Synopsis CSR 2014-001158-41 |
Trial Information
Subject Disposition
Baseline Characteristics
End Points
Adverse Events
More Information
Subject Disposition
Baseline Characteristics
End Points
Adverse Events
More Information
|
|||
Trial identification
|
|||
Sponsor protocol code |
P.64CU.001.01
|
||
Additional study identifiers
|
|||
ISRCTN number |
- | ||
US NCT number |
- | ||
WHO universal trial number (UTN) |
- | ||
Other trial identifiers |
n.a: n.a | ||
Sponsors
|
|||
Sponsor organisation name |
Sparkle srl
|
||
Sponsor organisation address |
Contrada Cavallino snc , Montecosaro, (MC), Italy, 62010
|
||
Public contact |
project manager, sparkle srl, 0039 0733229739, p.panichelli@sparklepet.it
|
||
Scientific contact |
project manager, sparkle srl, 0039 0733229739, p.panichelli@sparklepet.it
|
||
Paediatric regulatory details
|
|||
Is trial part of an agreed paediatric investigation plan (PIP) |
No
|
||
Does article 45 of REGULATION (EC) No 1901/2006 apply to this trial? |
No
|
||
Does article 46 of REGULATION (EC) No 1901/2006 apply to this trial? |
No
|
||
Results analysis stage
|
|||
Analysis stage |
Final
|
||
Date of interim/final analysis |
01 Apr 2017
|
||
Is this the analysis of the primary completion data? |
Yes
|
||
Primary completion date |
01 Apr 2017
|
||
Global end of trial reached? |
Yes
|
||
Global end of trial date |
01 Apr 2017
|
||
Was the trial ended prematurely? |
No
|
||
General information about the trial
|
|||
Main objective of the trial |
Initial assessment of the diagnostic sensibility, on a per-patient-basis, of whole body PET/CT, performed after the administration of 64Cu (II) Cl2, in the localization of metastatic lesions from PCa, of bones, lungs and lymph nodes (regional pelvic and/or lumbar and subfrenic nodes), preliminarly diagnosed on the basis of a Gold Standard surrogate, consisting of the integration of clinical and instrumental methods.
|
||
Protection of trial subjects |
The 64-copper chloride administered was equivalent of about 1-2 micrograms (1-2 millionths of gram, or, if preferred, 1-2 thousandths of milligram) of copper. Therefore, it was injected a maximum quantity equal to 1 / 50,000 of that of all the copper normally present in the organism, equal to 1/750 of that normally assumed daily with food (which is usually 1.5 milligrams / day). The administration of such an amount of copper chloride can not have, as far as it is widely known on the toxicity of copper, any side effects.
Based on dosimetry, the biological effect resulting from radiation can be precisely calculated. The radiation dose, biologically effective, associated with the 64-copper-chloride administration provided by the Protocol of Experimentation, is equal to about 20 milliSieverts (the milli-Sievert is a unit of measurement of the biological effect of radiation). However, a certain amount of radiation is also absorbed because of the beam of X ray emitted by the tomograph for the realization of CT images, and, in total, the "effective dose" absorbed by you during the examination will amount to about 32 milliSieverts.
This radiation dose is approximately equivalent to two and a half times that attributable to a "whole body" CT, of a diagnostic type, a medical examination performed frequently in the oncological patient.
|
||
Background therapy |
all enrolled patients were treated exclusivly with the IMP: 64Cu(II)Cl2/64-Copper Chloride. One single intravenous administration of 64Cu (II) Cl2 with activity equal to MBq = [20x body weight / 4 MBq] +/- 10%, was administrated.No comparators or non-test products were used. | ||
Evidence for comparator |
No comparators were used. | ||
Actual start date of recruitment |
28 Jun 2016
|
||
Long term follow-up planned |
No
|
||
Independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) involvement? |
No
|
||
Population of trial subjects
|
|||
Number of subjects enrolled per country |
|||
Country: Number of subjects enrolled |
Italy: 51
|
||
Worldwide total number of subjects |
51
|
||
EEA total number of subjects |
51
|
||
Number of subjects enrolled per age group |
|||
In utero |
0
|
||
Preterm newborn - gestational age < 37 wk |
0
|
||
Newborns (0-27 days) |
0
|
||
Infants and toddlers (28 days-23 months) |
0
|
||
Children (2-11 years) |
0
|
||
Adolescents (12-17 years) |
0
|
||
Adults (18-64 years) |
16
|
||
From 65 to 84 years |
33
|
||
85 years and over |
2
|
|
|||||||||||||||
Recruitment
|
|||||||||||||||
Recruitment details |
patients are recruited among these groups: Metastatic disease at the onset, diagnosed under staging; radically treated patients due to primary disease, with biochemical relapse, and in which metastases are identified; patients with metastatic disease recognized andmonitored by serial assays of PSA. 51 patients recruited. | ||||||||||||||
Pre-assignment
|
|||||||||||||||
Screening details |
age>=50;historical primitive PC;ADT treatment;previous metastatic disease on bone/ lung / lymph node; disease progression/restaging during ADT; whole body CT 20days before;whole body CT within 8months before or MRI or 18F-FCH PET/CT 20days before;no other neoplastic diseases excepted non-melanoma skin cancers;Karnofski’s index >80% | ||||||||||||||
Period 1
|
|||||||||||||||
Period 1 title |
overall baseline period (overall period)
|
||||||||||||||
Is this the baseline period? |
Yes | ||||||||||||||
Allocation method |
Not applicable
|
||||||||||||||
Blinding used |
Not blinded | ||||||||||||||
Arms
|
|||||||||||||||
Arm title
|
experimental | ||||||||||||||
Arm description |
- | ||||||||||||||
Arm type |
Experimental | ||||||||||||||
Investigational medicinal product name |
64CuCl2
|
||||||||||||||
Investigational medicinal product code |
|||||||||||||||
Other name |
|||||||||||||||
Pharmaceutical forms |
Solution for injection
|
||||||||||||||
Routes of administration |
Intravenous use
|
||||||||||||||
Dosage and administration details |
Single intravenous administration of 64Cu (II) Cl2 with activity equal to: MBq = [20x body weight / 4 MBq] +/- 10%
|
||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Baseline characteristics reporting groups
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reporting group title |
overall baseline period
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Reporting group description |
- | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||
End points reporting groups
|
|||
Reporting group title |
experimental
|
||
Reporting group description |
- |
|
|||||||
End point title |
sensitivity of 64Cu(II)Cl2 PET/CT in the localization of metastatic lesions [1] | ||||||
End point description |
Initial assessment of the diagnostic sensibility, on a per patient-basis, of whole body PET/CT after administration of 64Cu(II)Cl2, in the localization of metastatic lesions from PCa, of bones, lungs and lymph nodes (regional pelvic and/or lumbar and subfrenic nodes), preliminary diagnosed on the basis of a Gold Standard surrogate, consisting of the integration of clinical and instrumental methods
|
||||||
End point type |
Primary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
at study completion (Last patient out)
|
||||||
Notes [1] - No statistical analyses have been specified for this primary end point. It is expected there is at least one statistical analysis for each primary end point. Justification: This is a single arm trial and so, as EMA service desk answered (SD-164999) to our question, we can post the results without entering the details of the statistical analysis, since the system cannot currently accommodate one arm study. |
|||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
primary endpoint results |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||
End point title |
Initial assessment on lesion diagnostic sensitivity | ||||||
End point description |
the assessment of the lesion-based sensitivity was represented by the numerical ratio between the lesions-index correctly identified by the Observers, and those pre-determined by the Investigator, calculated separately for each anatomic category (bone, lung and lymph node, pelvic bone).
|
||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
at each PET/CT scan at 1hour, 4hours, 24hours from the IMP administration
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
sensitivity on lesion based results |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||||
End point title |
image quality analysis based on Target/Background | ||||||||
End point description |
The evaluation of the "target/background" ratio (T/B) is based on the measurement of: 1. the value of max SUV detected at the PET/CT in all the "index, bone, pulmonary and pelvic lymph nodes", with high diagnostic confidence, previously identified by the Investigator, in each examined subject. 2. the SUV max value of the average mm.glute of each side, and calculation of the mean and of the SUV max value of the mediastinum higher than the origin of the large vessels and in presence of pulmonary uptake sites: SUV max value of pulmonary tissue against lateral to the lesion, if free from alterations, or of free lung tissue, contralateral or homolateral to the lesion, at the same anatomical level in the height organ. 3. the T/B value as SUV max ratio (lesion)/SUV max (background), for each scan b. For lymph node metastases: SUV ratio max mts/SUV max mediastinum, c. For pulmonary metastases: SUV ratio max mts/SUVmax lung versus lateral 4.T/B index trend can be represented in graph
|
||||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||||
End point timeframe |
at each PET/CT scan at 1hour, 4hours, 24hours from the IMP administration
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||
Attachments |
Target to background results |
||||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||
End point title |
intra observer diagnostic reproducibility | ||||||
End point description |
Evaluation of intra-observer diagnostic reproducibility has been obtained verifying the fraction of concordant diagnosis (and the relative limits of confidence), expressed by the same Observer, when the same scan has been proposed again to the Observer, for the second time, at variable distance from the first one. Intra-observer reproducibility was analyzed for both patient-based and base-lesion analysis.
|
||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
at trial completition
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
intra-observer diagnostic reproducibility |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||
End point title |
inter observer diagnostic reproducibility | ||||||
End point description |
inter-observer reproducibility was evaluated by the concordance of each of the diagnostic readings randomly submitted to each Observer, with reference to the equivalent readings made by the other two Observers. The analysis was performed both on a patient-based and on a lesion basis, and expressed by calculating the Cohen k index (and the related confidence limits) using the "bootstrap block" method.
|
||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
covered all the trial period included the PET/CT scans analysis by the observers
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
inter-observer diagnostic reproducibility |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||
End point title |
optimization of post injection times | ||||||
End point description |
The definition of the optimal post-injective time for the execution of the 64Cu (II) Cl2 PET / CT examination in terms of: • Maximization the sensitivity of the patient-based methodology, • Maximization of the sensitivity of the method on a lesion basis, • Target-to-background contrast maximization, • Maximization of intra-observer diagnostic reproducibility (on a patient-based and on a lesion-based ), • Maximization of inter-observer diagnostic reproducibility (on a patient-based and on a lesion-based). This implies the definition of the aforementioned parameters independently for each of the post-injection scan times that were performed (1, 4 and 24 hours after IMP administration).
|
||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
1, 4 and 24 hours after IMP administration
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
optimal scan time |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||
End point title |
safety profile | ||||||
End point description |
evaluation of the frequency and of the clinical importance, as well as of the possible causality relationship with the administration of the IMP of the adverse events,
|
||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||
End point timeframe |
from IMP administration to last patient last visit at day 10 since IMP administration
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Attachments |
safety profile results |
||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||||
End point title |
kinetic of IMP | ||||||||
End point description |
The Investigator, performed the PET / CT examination for each subject, to calculate the absorbed dose, has manually outlined volumes of interest (VOI) on the organs whose kinetics were to be evaluated (tumor, surrounding tissue, liver, kidney, region vertebral-lumbar and soft tissues) and dosimetry directly using PET / CT coregistered images (both at 1h and at 4h and 24h from the injection). For these organs the masses were calculated and, from the quantification of the activity through the study of the kinetic, the cumulative activity. Using the Olinda / EXM program the S factor for the various organs was calculated. Therefore, using the MIRD (Medical Internal Radiation Dose) formalism, for the organs of greatest dosimetric interest, depending on the activity administered, the absorbed dose will be calculated.
|
||||||||
End point type |
Secondary
|
||||||||
End point timeframe |
at 1h and at 4h and 24h from the injection
|
||||||||
|
|||||||||
Attachments |
kinetics evaluation |
||||||||
No statistical analyses for this end point |
|
|||||||||||
Adverse events information [1]
|
|||||||||||
Timeframe for reporting adverse events |
the adverse event reporting started since the administration of the IMP to the last safety follow-up after 10 days.
|
||||||||||
Adverse event reporting additional description |
AE were collected during the follow up visits at 4hours, 24 hours and 10 days from the IMP administration and at any time by self-reporting signaling by the patient.
no AE has been verified during the trial.
|
||||||||||
Assessment type |
Systematic | ||||||||||
Dictionary used for adverse event reporting
|
|||||||||||
Dictionary name |
MedDRA | ||||||||||
Dictionary version |
18
|
||||||||||
Reporting groups
|
|||||||||||
Reporting group title |
AE reporting group
|
||||||||||
Reporting group description |
All the subjects who received the IMP dose (total 50 patients) were included in the AE reporting Group (50 patients). | ||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Frequency threshold for reporting non-serious adverse events: 0% | |||||||||||
|
|||||||||||
Notes [1] - There are no non-serious adverse events recorded for these results. It is expected that there will be at least one non-serious adverse event reported. Justification: Due to the short period of the trial, 10 days from IMP administration to the last followup visit, no adverse events occured |
|
|||
Substantial protocol amendments (globally) |
|||
Were there any global substantial amendments to the protocol? No | |||
Interruptions (globally) |
|||
Were there any global interruptions to the trial? No | |||
Limitations and caveats |
|||
Limitations of the trial such as small numbers of subjects analysed or technical problems leading to unreliable data. | |||
None reported |