Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT02511678

Multicenter Study of Cryoablation for Palliation of Painful Bone Metastases

This study will evaluate the efficacy of cryoablation for palliation of painful metastases in participants with metastatic lesions involving bone who have failed, are not candidates for, or are not experiencing adequate pain relief from current pain therapies (for example, radiation, analgesics).

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

Institut Bergonié, Bordeaux, France

Loading trial locations.

About this study

Participants with painful metastatic lesions involving bone who meet the eligibility criteria and who have been determined to be an appropriate candidate for cryoablation therapy were offered enrollment into the study. Participants agreeing to participate will read and sign an informed consent form and thus become participants in the study. Treatment will be performed using a Galil Medical cryoablation system and Galil Medical cryoablation needles. Participants will have one cryoablation procedure and will be followed for up to 6 months for palliation of pain, quality of life, and analgesic usage. Baseline and follow-up data will be collected for each participant via a web-based electronic data collection tool.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • 18 years of age or older
  • Metastatic disease involving bone with metastatic disease previously confirmed by prior biopsy; or Metastatic disease involving bone previously confirmed on imaging (for example, computed tomography [CT] or magnetic resonance imaging [MRI]) with known (biopsied) primary disease (primary bone cancer is excluded)
  • Current analgesic therapies have failed, the participant is not a candidate for, or the participant is not experiencing adequate pain relief from current pain therapies (for example, radiation, analgesics)
  • The 'worst pain' in the last 24 hours must be reported to be 4 or above on a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (pain as bad as participant can imagine)
  • Pain must be from one painful metastatic lesion involving the bone that is amenable to cryoablation with CT (additional less painful metastatic sites may be present)
  • Cryoablation should be performed within 14 days of screening visit
  • If taking hormonal therapy, use should be stable (no changes within 4 weeks prior to the cryoablation procedure)
  • Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS) score ≥60
  • Life expectancy ≥3 months
  • No debilitating medical or psychiatric illness that would preclude giving informed consent or receiving optimal treatment and follow-up
  • Known coagulopathy or bleeding disorders are controlled

Exclusion criteria

  • Primary cancer is leukemia, lymphoma, or myeloma
  • Tumor involves a weight-bearing long bone of the lower extremity with the tumor causing >50% loss of cortical bone
  • Has undergone prior surgery at the tumor site or the index tumor has undergone previous surgery or ablation treatment
  • Prior radiation therapy of the index tumor <3 weeks prior to the screening visit
  • Index tumor causing clinical or radiographic evidence of spinal cord or cauda equina compression/effacement
  • Anticipated treatment of the index tumor that would require iceball formation within 0.5 centimeters (cm) of the spinal cord, brain, other critical nerve structure, or large abdominal vessel (possibly achieved with additional maneuvers such as hydrodissection)
  • Index tumor involves the skull
  • Currently pregnant, nursing, or wishing to become pregnant during the study
  • Serious medical illness, including any of the following: uncontrolled congestive heart failure, uncontrolled angina, myocardial infarction, or cerebrovascular event within 6 months prior to the screening visit
  • Concurrent participation in other studies that could affect the primary endpoint

Treatment and study plan

Cryoablation

Device

The application of repeated freeze and thaw cycles to the identified tissues.

Other names: Cryotherapy, Cryosurgery, Visual-ICE™ Cryoablation System, IceSeed® Cryoablation Needle, IceSphere™ Cryoablation Needle, IceRod® PLUS Cryoablation Needle, IceEDGE® 2.4 Cryoablation Needle, IceFORCE® 2.1 Cryoablation Needle, IcePearl® 2.1 Cryoablation Needle

Primary outcomes

  1. Change From Baseline in Worst Pain Scores as Assessed by the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form (BPI-SF) at Week 8

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 8

    The BPI-SF is a validated instrument used widely in clinical research to assess cancer pain. Assessments were of self-reported worst pain scores in the last 24 hours in the target lesion treated with study cryoablation on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) using the BPI-SF. Improvement in self-reported pain scores is defined by ≥2-point reduction in worst pain. A mean difference of a 2-point reduction is considered clinically significant, that is improvement. Baseline data and change from Baseline data at Week 8 is presented.

Other outcomes

  1. Percentage of Participants Who Respond to the Cryoablation Therapy

    Time frame: Baseline and Week 8

    Response was defined as a ≥2-point reduction from baseline in worst pain in last 24 hours with stable medication use (that is, no more than a 25% increase in Morphine Equivalent Daily Dose [MEDD] from baseline). MEDD is calculated using the following formula: [Dose]*[MEDD Factor]. MEDD Factor is based on the type and dose of the opioid received. Pain was assessed using BPI-SF with a scale of 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable). Percentages are proportion of responders based on logistic regression after MCMC, multiple imputation. For visits where medication use is not available, morphine equivalent values from the most recent non-missing visit are used.

  2. Change From Baseline in QoL as Indicated by the Overall Average BPI-SF Interference Score at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24.

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    Quality of Life (QoL) as indicated by the change in overall average BPI-SF Pain Interference score from baseline to each visit was evaluated at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24. Using the BPI-SF, participants rated the amount of interference from pain on a scale of 0 (does not interfere) to 10 (completely interferes) for the following areas: general activity. mood, walking ability, relations, sleep, and enjoyment. For participants with responses ≥50% of the areas at a time point, a total Pain Interference score, which was the mean of the individual area scores, was calculated programmatically at that point. Baseline data and change from Baseline data is presented.

  3. Change From Baseline in Physical Function as Assessed by the KPS Scale at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    The Karnofsky Performance Status (KPS) scale is a standard way of measuring the ability of cancer participants to perform ordinary tasks. KPS may be used to determine a participant's prognosis and to measure changes in a participant's ability to function. Assessments made by examining the change in the baseline scores to those reported post-operatively. KPS scores range from 0 to 100. A higher score means the participant is better able to carry out daily activities from Baseline to 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 weeks after cryoablation. Baseline data and change from Baseline data is presented.

  4. Number of Participants With Additional Pain Therapies

    Time frame: Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    Participants requiring additional targeted therapies to the index tumor (for example, cryoablation, radio frequency ablation [RFA], microwave ablation [MWA], high intensity focused ultrasound [HIFU], radiation, surgery) were withdrawn from the study. Other therapies, including pain medication and chemotherapy, were permitted during the study. All additional therapies were recorded. The number of participants requiring new therapy since the last visit is presented.

  5. Change From Baseline in MEDD and NSAID Doses at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    Analgesic (that is, opioid or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug [NSAID]) use and the reason for each change in analgesic dose was recorded at each study visit. Opioid medications were converted to a standardized MEDD. MEDD is calculated using the following formula: [Dose]*[MEDD Factor]. MEDD Factor is based on the type and dose of the opioid received. Baseline data and change from Baseline data is presented.

  6. Change From Baseline in Worst Pain Scores as Assessed by the BPI-SF at Weeks 1, 4, 12, 16, 20, and 24

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 1, Week 4, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    The BPI-SF is a validated instrument used widely in clinical research to assess cancer pain. Assessments were of self-reported worst pain scores in the last 24 hours in the target lesion treated with study cryoablation on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) using the BPI-SF. Improvement in self-reported pain scores is defined by ≥2-point reduction in worst pain. A mean difference of a 2 point reduction is considered clinically significant, that is improvement. Baseline data and change from Baseline data at Weeks 1, 4, 12, 16, 20, and 24 is presented.

  7. Change From Baseline in Average Pain Scores as Assessed by the BPI-SF at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

    Time frame: Baseline, Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    The BPI-SF is a validated instrument used widely in clinical research to assess cancer pain. Assessments were of self-reported average pain scores in the last 24 hours in the target lesion treated with study cryoablation on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst pain imaginable) using the BPI-SF. Baseline data and change from Baseline data is presented.

  8. Self-Assessed Overall Treatment Effect (OTE) at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24

    Time frame: Week 1, Week 4, Week 8, Week 12, Week 16, Week 20, and Week 24

    Participants performed a self-assessment of OTE at Week 1 and every visit thereafter (Weeks 4, 8, 12, 16, 20 and 24). Participants were asked their opinion of the effect cryoablation procedure had on their wellbeing and asked to compare their wellbeing at the time of each follow-up visit to the previous visit or phone call. The wellbeing categories were "Better than the Last Visit," "The Same as the Last Visit," and "Worse than the Last Visit." The percentage of participants that were reported for each wellbeing category at Weeks 1, 4, 8, 12, 16, 20, and 24 is presented.

  9. Number of Participants With Intra- or Post-operative Adverse Events, a Serious Adverse Event, or Unanticipated Adverse Device Effects

    Time frame: Baseline up to 30 days post-cryoablation

    The number of participants with an intra-operative non-serious adverse event, a post-operative, a non-serious adverse event, a serious adverse event, or unanticipated adverse device effects related to the cryoablation procedure is presented. A summary of serious and all other non-serious adverse events, regardless of causality, is located in the Reported Adverse Events module.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Boston Scientific Corporation

Industry

Registry information

Acronym: MOTION

Important dates

Study start
2016
Primary completion
2018
Study completion
2018
First posted
Jul 30, 2015
Registry last updated
Jul 19, 2021

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.