Characterising Metastatic Penile Cancer Using Molecular Imaging - Hybrid MRI-PET [MRI-PET]
NCT ID: NCT02104063
Last Updated: 2025-03-10
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
COMPLETED
78 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2013-07-22
2016-07-22
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
In the majority of patients diagnosed with penile cancer obvious abnormalities cannot be felt in the groin even though the cancer may have already spread to the lymph nodes in the groin. In these patients, a procedure called Dynamic Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (DSLB) is required to determine if the cancer has spread to the lymph nodes in the groin. In DSLB a radioactive substance is injected at the site of the penile cancer and then travels to the lymph nodes in the groin which are then biopsied. This procedure requires a general anaesthetic and an in-patient hospital stay.
In approximately 20% of patients with penile cancer obvious abnormalities can be felt in the lymph nodes in the groin. However, any abnormality detected may not necessarily be due to metastatic disease. In order to confirm if metastatic disease is present in the lymph nodes of these patients a biopsy is also required. However in these patients the lymph nodes are detected and biopsied using an ultrasound scan rather than by passing a radioactive substance into the body.
MRI-PET is a new procedure which combines conventional MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) and PET (Positron Emission Tomography) scans into one scan. MRI - PET scans create very clear pictures of internal body structures. MRI-PET is a non-invasive procedure which can be performed on an out-patient basis.
The accuracy of MRI-PET in detecting metastatic penile cancer is not known. The main purpose of this study is to establish the effectiveness of MRI-PET compared to DSLB and ultrasound guided biopsy in detecting the presence of metastatic disease in the lymph nodes of patients with penile cancer. If effective, MRI-PET could replace the invasive procedures currently required for detection of metastatic penile cancer.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
[18F] PSMA-1007 PET/CT in Metastatic Clear Cell Renal Cell Carcinoma
NCT06428708
Efficacy of PET/MRI in Detecting Metastatic Disease in Endometrial Cancer
NCT02765698
MRI-based Clinico-radiomics Predicting Lymph Node Metastasis Status of Hilar Cholangiocarcinoma
NCT05626127
PET Scan in Treating Patients With Metastatic Prostate Cancer
NCT00002981
Clinical and Molecular Correlates of Positron Emission Tomography (PET) With 89Zr-DFO-huJ591 in Metastatic Prostate Cancer
NCT01543659
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
Simultaneous PET and MRI using new hybrid MRI-PET systems promises optimal spatial and temporal co-registration of structural, functional, and molecular image data. The theoretical advantages of hybrid MRI-PET scanning compared to CT-PET are better soft tissue resolution, which is advantageous for the small lymph nodes, and also decreased radiation exposure. Also, local staging of the primary penile tumour could be performed simultaneously with the inguinal lymph nodes using MRI-PET. If effective, MRI-PET would provide a single non-invasive imaging test that would replace dynamic sentinel lymph node biopsy (which is operator dependent, involves a general anaesthetic, in-patient hospital stay and has associated morbidity) in the detection of micrometastatic deposits in those patients with cN0 (impalpable inguinal lymph nodes) disease. In addition to this, a single MRI-PET sequence will also stage the primary lesion.
University College London Hospital (UCLH) manages the largest number of penile cancer patients in the United Kingdom (UK). Hybrid MRI-PET is a new imaging modality which could result in significant cost savings, and more importantly, avoid invasive operative procedures necessitating in-patient hospital stay (with the associated potential for significant morbidity). UCLH currently has the only hybrid MRI-PET scanner in the UK. This research is unique and groundbreaking and could have a dramatic impact for penile cancer patients. Additionally, as serum, blood and frozen tissue from this cohort of patients will be collected and stored , this will provide an extremely valuable resource for future translational studies.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
MRI-PET
Participants will have an MRI-PET scan (the Index test) in addition to the procedures they would normally receive as their standard of care (Reference tests). The accuracy of MRI-PET in detecting or ruling out metastatic penile cancer will be compared to the reference tests.
MRI-PET
Participants will have an MRI-PET scan (the Index test) in addition to the procedures they would normally receive as their standard of care (Reference tests). The accuracy of MRI-PET in detecting or ruling out metastatic penile cancer will be compared to the reference tests.
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
MRI-PET
Participants will have an MRI-PET scan (the Index test) in addition to the procedures they would normally receive as their standard of care (Reference tests). The accuracy of MRI-PET in detecting or ruling out metastatic penile cancer will be compared to the reference tests.
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Men aged \>= 18 years.
* Willing and able to give written informed consent prior to study entry.
* Patients must be sterile or agree to use adequate contraception during the study period.
Exclusion Criteria
* Any known contraindication to MRI such as ferrous metal implants, electrical implants (e.g. cochlear implants, cardiac pacemaker), or history of injury involving metal fragments.
* Any known contraindication to PET scans.
* Any known allergy to FDG (18F-2-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose fluorodeoxyglucose).
* Uncontrolled diabetes.
* Inability to comply with the study procedures.
* Medical or psychiatric illness, which makes the patient unsuitable or unable to give informed consent.
18 Years
MALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
Queen Mary University of London
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Manit Arya, MBChB, FRCS
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
University College London Hospitals
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
University College London Hospitals
London, , United Kingdom
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Parkin DM, Muir CS. Cancer Incidence in Five Continents. Comparability and quality of data. IARC Sci Publ. 1992;(120):45-173. No abstract available.
Jemal A, Siegel R, Ward E, Murray T, Xu J, Thun MJ. Cancer statistics, 2007. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007 Jan-Feb;57(1):43-66. doi: 10.3322/canjclin.57.1.43.
Srinivas V, Morse MJ, Herr HW, Sogani PC, Whitmore WF Jr. Penile cancer: relation of extent of nodal metastasis to survival. J Urol. 1987 May;137(5):880-2. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)44281-9.
Ravi R. Correlation between the extent of nodal involvement and survival following groin dissection for carcinoma of the penis. Br J Urol. 1993 Nov;72(5 Pt 2):817-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410x.1993.tb16273.x.
Horenblas S, van Tinteren H. Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. IV. Prognostic factors of survival: analysis of tumor, nodes and metastasis classification system. J Urol. 1994 May;151(5):1239-43. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)35221-7.
Lont AP, Kroon BK, Gallee MP, van Tinteren H, Moonen LM, Horenblas S. Pelvic lymph node dissection for penile carcinoma: extent of inguinal lymph node involvement as an indicator for pelvic lymph node involvement and survival. J Urol. 2007 Mar;177(3):947-52; discussion 952. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2006.10.060.
Sanchez-Ortiz RF, Pettaway CA. The role of lymphadenectomy in penile cancer. Urol Oncol. 2004 May-Jun;22(3):236-44; discussion 244-5. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2004.04.031.
Pandey D, Mahajan V, Kannan RR. Prognostic factors in node-positive carcinoma of the penis. J Surg Oncol. 2006 Feb 1;93(2):133-8. doi: 10.1002/jso.20414.
Ornellas AA, Kinchin EW, Nobrega BL, Wisnescky A, Koifman N, Quirino R. Surgical treatment of invasive squamous cell carcinoma of the penis: Brazilian National Cancer Institute long-term experience. J Surg Oncol. 2008 May 1;97(6):487-95. doi: 10.1002/jso.20980.
Wespes E. The management of regional lymph nodes in patients with penile carcinoma and reliability of sentinel node biopsy. Eur Urol. 2007 Jul;52(1):15-6; discussion 20-1. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2007.02.045. Epub 2007 Mar 1. No abstract available.
Protzel C, Alcaraz A, Horenblas S, Pizzocaro G, Zlotta A, Hakenberg OW. Lymphadenectomy in the surgical management of penile cancer. Eur Urol. 2009 May;55(5):1075-88. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2009.02.021. Epub 2009 Feb 23.
Heyns CF, Fleshner N, Sangar V, Schlenker B, Yuvaraja TB, van Poppel H. Management of the lymph nodes in penile cancer. Urology. 2010 Aug;76(2 Suppl 1):S43-57. doi: 10.1016/j.urology.2010.03.001.
Ficarra V, Zattoni F, Artibani W, Fandella A, Martignoni G, Novara G, Galetti TP, Zambolin T, Kattan MW; G.U.O.N.E. Penile Cancer Project Members. Nomogram predictive of pathological inguinal lymph node involvement in patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. J Urol. 2006 May;175(5):1700-4; discussion 1704-5. doi: 10.1016/S0022-5347(05)01003-7.
Leijte JA, Hughes B, Graafland NM, Kroon BK, Olmos RA, Nieweg OE, Corbishley C, Heenan S, Watkin N, Horenblas S. Two-center evaluation of dynamic sentinel node biopsy for squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jul 10;27(20):3325-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.6870. Epub 2009 May 4.
Horenblas S, van Tinteren H, Delemarre JF, Moonen LM, Lustig V, van Waardenburg EW. Squamous cell carcinoma of the penis. III. Treatment of regional lymph nodes. J Urol. 1993 Mar;149(3):492-7. doi: 10.1016/s0022-5347(17)36126-8.
Hegarty PK, Kayes O, Freeman A, Christopher N, Ralph DJ, Minhas S. A prospective study of 100 cases of penile cancer managed according to European Association of Urology guidelines. BJU Int. 2006 Sep;98(3):526-31. doi: 10.1111/j.1464-410X.2006.06296.x.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
008956QM
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.