Radium-223 dichloride (Xofigo, BAY88-8223)
DrugRadium-223 dichloride 50 kBq/kg b.w., 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals.
Other names: Alpharadin
NCT Number: NCT00699751
ALSYMPCA (ALpharadin in SYMPtomatic Prostate CAncer) is an international Phase III clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Radium-223 dichloride in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer and skeletal metastases.
Looking for future studies?
Notify Me18 year and older
Male
Interventional
Phase 3
Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia
The aim of the study was to compare, in patients with symptomatic hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) and skeletal metastases, the efficacy of best standard of care plus Radium-223 dichloride versus best standard of care plus placebo, with the primary efficacy endpoint being overall survival (OS).
Patients were randomised in a 2:1 allocation ratio (Radium-223 dichloride:Placebo). The study treatment consisted of 6 intravenous administrations of Radium-223 dichloride or placebo (saline) each separated by an interval of 4 weeks. The patient were followed until 3 years after first study drug administration.
Within the U.S., the trial was conducted under an IND sponsored by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.
All patients received BSoC (Best Standard of Care).
This study has the original PCD as 14 October 2010, when a total of 316 deaths had been observed; this resulted in the Independent Data Monitoring Committee's (IDMC's) recommendation to stop the study as the primary efficacy analysis of overall survival had crossed the pre-specified boundary for efficacy. Later an updated analysis of primary endpoint in the first addendum was done with cut-off of 15 July 2011.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Radium-223 dichloride 50 kBq/kg b.w., 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals.
Other names: Alpharadin
Isotonic saline 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals.
Best standard of care is regarded as the routine standard of care at each center, for example local EBRT (External Beam Radiation Therapy), corticosteroids, antiandrogens, estrogens (e.g., stilboestrol), estramustine or ketoconazole.
Time frame: From randomization to death due to any cause until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment, the data was collected up to the second data analysis date (15 JUL 2011)
Overall survival was defined as the time from date of randomization to the date of death.
Time frame: From randomization to first ALP progression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The time from the first study drug administration to when ALP progression was observed, defined as: 1) In subjects with no ALP decline from baseline; a greater than or equal to 25% increase from baseline value and an increase in absolute value of greater than or equal to 2 ng/mL, at least 12 weeks from baseline; 2) In subjects with initial ALP decline from baseline; the time from start of treatment to first ALP increase that is greater than or equal to 25% increase and at least 2 ng/mL above the nadir value, which was confirmed by a second value obtained 3 or more weeks later
Time frame: At Baseline and Week 12
ALP levels were measured in participants' blood at Week 12 and compared to baseline values. A confirmed total ALP response (either >/= 30% or 50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second total ALP value approximately 4 weeks later.
Time frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase)
ALP levels were measured in participants' blood at EOT (Week 24) and compared to baseline values. A confirmed total ALP response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second total ALP value approximately 4 weeks later.
Time frame: At Baseline and Week 12
The return of total ALP value to within normal range at 12 weeks in 2 consecutive measurements (at least 2 weeks apart) after start of treatment in subjects who had ALP above the upper limit of normal (ULN) at baseline.
Time frame: At Baseline and Week 12
ALP level was measured in subject's blood at Week 12 and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (ALP level at week 12 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100
Time frame: From baseline to Week 12
ALP level was measured in participant's blood up to week 12 and the maximum percent decrease from the baseline up to Week 12 value was calculated as the minimum value of [(ALP level up to week 12 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
Time frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase)
ALP level was measured in subject's blood at EOT (Week 24) and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (ALP level at EOT minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100
Time frame: From baseline During the 24 Week Treatment
ALP level was measured in participant's blood during the 24 week treatment (up to EOT) and the maximum percent decrease from baseline during the 24 week treatment value was calculated as the minimum value of [(ALP level up to week 24 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
Time frame: From randomization to first PSA progression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The time from the first study drug administration to when PSA progression was observed, defined as: 1) In subjects with no PSA decline from baseline; a greater than or equal to 25% increase from baseline value and an increase in absolute value of greater than or equal to 2 ng/mL, at least 12 weeks from baseline; 2) In subjects with initial PSA decline from baseline; the time from start of treatment to first PSA increase that is greater than or equal to 25% increase and at least 2 ng/mL above the nadir value, which was confirmed by a second value obtained 3 or more weeks later
Time frame: At Baseline and Week 12
PSA levels were measured in participants' blood at Week 12 and compared to baseline values. A confirmed PSA response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second PSA value approximately 4 weeks later.
Time frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase)
PSA levels were measured in participants' blood at EOT (Week 24) and compared to baseline values. A confirmed PSA response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second PSA value approximately 4 weeks later.
Time frame: At Baseline and Week 12
PSA level was measured in subject's blood at Week 12 and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (PSA level at week 12 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100
Time frame: From baseline up to Week 12
PSA level was measured in participant's blood up to Week 12 and the maximum percent decrease from the baseline up to week 12 value was calculated as the minimum value of [(PSA level up to week 12 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
Time frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase)
PSA level was measured in subject's blood at EOT (Week 24) and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (PSA level at EOT minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100
Time frame: From baseline to End of Treatment (Week 24; 4 weeks post last injection)
PSA level was measured in participant's blood during the 24 week treatment (up to EOT) and the maximum percent decrease from baseline during the 24 Week treatment value was calculated as the minimum value of [(PSA level up to week 24 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
Time frame: From randomization to first first SRE until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
A skeletal related event is the use of external beam radiotherapy to relieve skeletal symptoms or the occurrence of new symptomatic pathological bone fractures (vertebral or non-vertebral) or the occurrence of spinal cord compression or a tumour related orthopaedic surgical intervention. For all other events, the start date of the event/medication/therapy was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to first EBRT until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of therapy was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to first use of radioisotopes until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of the radioisotopes was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to occurrence of first new symptomatic pathological bone fractures until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of the event was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to occurrence of first tumor related orthopedic surgical intervention until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of the intervention was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to first spinal cord compression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of the compression was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to first start of any other anti-cancer treatment until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
The start date of the treatment was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
Time frame: From randomization to first deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment
ECOG scores were: 0 = fully active; 1 = restricted in physically strenuous activity; 2 = ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to work; 3 = capable of only limited self-care; 4 = completely disabled; 5 = death. The visit at which a 2-point or more deterioration in PS was observed was the time of the event. ECOG was assessed at every visit. If a marked deterioration in PS has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the participant was lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables were censored at the last assessment date.
Time frame: Week 0
ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
Time frame: Week 8
ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
Time frame: Week 16
ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
Time frame: Week 24
ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score for the FACT-P TOI domain (physical and social well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated for each visit. Prostate Cancer Trial Outcome Index (TOI): Physical Well-being (PWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB) + Prostate Cancer (PCS). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 104 (best).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score for the FACT-P TOI domain (physical and social well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated for each visit. Possible scores were 0 to 104; the higher the score, the better the quality of life. The changes from baseline (range -104 to 104) in the domain FACT-P TOI were summarized using descriptive statistics at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2.
Time frame: At Week 16
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Week 16.
Time frame: At Week 24
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Week 24.
Time frame: At Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Follow-up Visit 2.
Time frame: At Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2.FACT-P Total Score: Physical Well-being (PWB) + Social/Family Well-being (SWB) + Emotional Well-being (EWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB) + Prostate Cancer (PCS). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 156 (best).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (week 42)
The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Total possible score was 156; a higher score indicates a better quality of life. The changes from baseline in the FACT-P total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and prostate specific score) were calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. Possible range was -156 to 156.
Time frame: At Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-G instrument consisted of 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. The FACT-G absolute total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being) was calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. FACT-G Total Score: Physical Well-being (PWB) + Social/Family Well-being (SWB) + Emotional Well-being (EWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 108 (best).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42)
The FACT-G instrument consisted of 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. Total possible score was 108; a higher score indicates a better quality of life. The changes from baseline in the FACT-G total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being) were calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. Possible range was -108 to 108.
Time frame: Week 16
The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at Week 16, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').
Time frame: Week 24
The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at Week 24, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').
Time frame: Follow-up Visit 8 (Week 139)
The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at follow-up visit 8, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').
Bayer
Industry
A Double-blind, Randomised, Multiple Dose, Phase III, Multicentre Study of Alpharadin in the Treatment of Patients With Symptomatic Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer With Skeletal Metastases
Acronym: ALSYMPCA
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT00667199
Bone Metastases, Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer
View Trial DetailsNCT00156884
Bone Metastases, Genital Diseases
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
View Trial DetailsNCT00987753
Genital Diseases, Genital Diseases, Male
Birmingham, Alabama, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT00583024
Genital Diseases, Genital Diseases, Male
Iowa City, Iowa, United States
View Trial Details