ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT02320448Updated Sep 12, 2017

Treating Peritoneal Carcinomatosis With PIPAC

A Phase 2 interventional study of PIPAC in Peritoneal Carcinomatosis, sponsored by Michael Bau Mortensen. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-09-12.

Sponsored by Michael Bau Mortensen · Phase 2, Interventional, and Treatment

Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
35
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Where this study stands

Counted across the records on this site · 2026-11-12

Among 14 studies testing cisplatin in Peritoneal Neoplasms — 4 open to participants now, 6 under way, none of them phase 3. Cisplatin · Peritoneal Neoplasms.

Enrollment
6th of 14
35 · median 27
Started
2015
the only one that year
Phase 2
8 of 14
2 open now
Registered
5th of 14
by date
Lead sponsor
2 of 14
Michael Bau Mortensen

Among the 14 studies testing cisplatin in Peritoneal Neoplasms, this one is the 6th largest by enrollment, is the only one that started in 2015, is one of 8 in phase 2, and was the 5th registered.

By phase

14 studies; the count open now beside each. This study's row is marked.

Phase 2this study8 · 2 open
Phase 15 · 2 open
No phase1 · 0 open

By the year they started

First in 1997; this study’s year is marked. 1 started in 2015.

Size and results

Median enrollment 27 across the 14 interventional studies. Of the 8 that completed or were terminated, 3 (38%) have results posted.

Watch this landscapeDownload CSVWith an account: a weekly mail of what changed among 14 studies testing cisplatin in Peritoneal Neoplasms, or all of them as a file.
02

Study summary

This is a feasibility study that aims to evaluate whether PIPAC (Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy) is a safe and feasible treatment in Danish patients with peritoneal cancer.

Read the detailed description

Peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC) represents end stage disease in many types of cancer (e.g. gastric, pancreatic, liver, colo-rectal, ovarian) and the majority of patients with PC will die from their disease within 6 months. Platinum-based systemic chemotherapy (SC) may prolong survival in selected patients, but poor performance status and low response rates have led to conservative (nihilistic) treatment strategies in these patients. However, patients with PC who are in good condition, and with a remaining life expectancy of more than a few months, may still have an unmet need for additional treatment in order to be able to perform with a high quality of life for as long as possible. These patients often have tried several lines of SC with disappointing results, and alternative and more effective treatment strategies are desperately needed.

The installation of chemotherapeutic agents within the peritoneal cavity would seem a simple and effective treatment of PC - at least from a theoretical point of view. Unfortunately, the effect of intraperitoneal chemotherapy on PC is disappointing. Like with SC, the poor response rates may be explained by the poor penetration of the active chemical substances into the PC plaques. Combining cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with intraperitoneal chemotherapy has gained interest in the recent years, but this approach can only be used in highly selected patients (where CRS is possible), and the procedure carries a significant risk of complications and side effects. Thus, a minimally invasive and safe delivery of relevant chemotherapy in such concentration that may allow it to work efficiently on the PC plaques would be an ideal platform for a new treatment strategy in these patients.

Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) Temperature and pressure are important factors during absorption of fluid from the peritoneal cavity, and the use of a relative low intraperitoneal pressure (2-6 mmHg) seems to increase the inflow of intraperitoneal fluid into the abdominal wall. Studies have confirmed that higher tissue concentrations of chemotherapy may be obtained by increasing the intraperitoneal pressure. After years of extensive testing, and the development of a micro-pump for safe aerosol infusion, a German research group has designed a system that allows a laparoscopy controlled, intraperitoneal aerosol infusion of chemotherapy (doxorubicin and cisplatin). The aerosol technique ensures that the entire peritoneal surface is covered by chemotherapy, and this is relevant in patients with PC. With the micro-pump positioned through a standard trocar pointing away from the bowels, a commercially available injection pump provides the necessary pressure to induce an aerosol mist covering the peritoneal cavity. After five minutes, the chemotherapy has been delivered, and the injector is turned off. After an additional 25 minutes of simple diffusion, the intra-abdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a standard trocar.

Recently, a German research group published their preliminary experience with PIPAC in gastric and ovarian cancer patients with PC .

PIPAC is not available freely on the market, and the procedure is not FDA approved yet. The German research team has emphasized, that despite the very encouraging results obtained so far, the efficacy and safety of PIPAC still has to be assessed in adequate clinical trials.

Aim In a compassionate use program, the aim of this study is to implement and evaluate the PIPAC procedure at Odense University Hospital under strict observation of both patient and occupational health safety aspects. Thus, it is important to emphasize, that the primary aim of this feasibility study is a quick and safe implementation of a new combined surgical-oncologic treatment technique which uses conventional chemotherapy in a new way in desperately ill cancer patients. For technical and safety reasons this implementation needs to be fulfilled and documented before patients can be enrolled in clinical trials.

Hypothesis The investigators expect the PIPAC procedure to be feasible and safe, with a primary non-access ratio of maximum 7:35 (mainly due to adhesions). The investigators expect a CTCAE grade of no more than 3 and that the procedure is safe for both patients, surgeons and OR staff.

Method

Study design This is a feasibility study where the PIPAC procedure will be performed in 35 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria.

Implementation of the PIPAC procedure In order to cover all safety aspects and to secure optimal treatment results, a complete manual and checklist for the entire PIPAC procedure, as well as for pre- and postoperative patient handling, has been made. Thus, every step of the procedure is carefully described and monitored, and prior to the first patient treatment, the entire PIPAC procedure will be tried in a "dummy" OR setup supervised by the German group. Although this group has documented, that the procedure is safe for both patients and health care workers, the procedure will only be performed in an OR with laminar airflow and a closed carbon dioxide (CO2) ventilation system. In addition, environmental measurements (platinum particles within the OR) and bio-monitoring (blood samples) of the OR team are scheduled from the beginning of the first PIPAC procedure.

Preliminary clinical evaluation 35 patients with PC (see inclusion criteria) will be scheduled for PIPAC. In collaboration with the German group, the local multidisciplinary team (MDT) meeting will carefully select patients suitable for the PIPAC procedure. These patients are included according to national regulations and rules on experimental cancer research. All PIPAC procedures are performed with prophylactic antibiotics and start with a classification of the extent of the PC (Peritoneal Cancer Index, PCI) followed by selected quadrant biopsies to document malignancy and for later translational research. The type and doses of chemotherapy (1/10 of systemic dose), intra-abdominal pressure, temperature and delivery time are similar to those used by the German group. After the PIPAC procedure, the patients will be observed for two days before discharge. The treatment response is monitored by CT, and by a follow-up laparoscopy procedure with PCI score and biopsies after six weeks. The PIPAC procedure will be repeated during the same evaluation laparoscopy if objective response or no progression is observed. Adverse medical events will be graded according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE, version 4.0), and surgical related complications according to the Dindo-Clavien classification.

Intra-abdominal access and completion of the PIPAC procedure in 28 of 35 patients and discharge of the same group within 2 POD are considered a successful implementation of the PIPAC procedure.

Occupational health safety aspects For safety reasons no staff is in the OR during the PIPAC procedure. The injector is controlled by a footswitch from outside the OR room, and observation monitors related to the anesthesiology are also made visible from outside the OR. Since no personnel are inside the ventilated OR room during application of the aerosolized chemotherapy, there are three barriers between surgeons/OR staff and the chemotherapy: The closed abdominal cavity, the laminar airflow system and the OR walls. The tightness of the abdominal cavity is controlled by allowing a maximum CO2 flow of 0.1-0.2 L/min corresponding to the body resorption of CO2. After the procedure, intraabdominal air saturated with chemotherapy is evacuated through a series of filters and into a closed system. Closure of the trocar sites, removal and disposal of dressings and syringes into special chemotherapy waste bins are performed by the surgeon alone. Environmental biomonitoring and blood samples from the surgeons and OR staff are scheduled as part of the safety monitoring.

Patient safety All patients are carefully selected (see exclusion criteria) on the MDT. The establishing of pneumoperitoneum and use of trocars are based on the highest standards for laparoscopic surgery which have a high safety profile. The procedures are performed by experienced laparoscopic surgeons under the supervision of the German team. When following the safety protocol used by the German group, no mortality related to the PIPAC procedure has been observed. The risk of bowel perforation is 2 per mille, port site metastases occur in 0.6% of the procedures, and self- limiting erythema around the trocar site is found in 1.2% of the procedures (private communication, professor Marc A. Reymond).

A short period of postoperative fever and/or elevated acute phase proteins have been observed after the PIPAC procedure, but the majority of patients may be discharged the same or the following day, and the PIPAC procedure can be repeated several times.

03

Conditions studied

  • Peritoneal Carcinomatosis

Browse trials for

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Histological or cytological verified .
  • Clinical or radiological evidence of peritoneal carcinomatosis.
  • No indication for standard chemotherapy.
  • Performance status 0-2 and of more than 3 months.
  • Age > 18 years.
  • Written must be obtained according to the local Ethics Committee requirements.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria

  • Symptomatic small bowel obstruction (Total parenteral nutrition, nasogastric tube).
  • Previous treatment with maximum cumulative doses of doxorubicin, daunorubicin, epirubicin, idarubicin, and/or other anthracyclines and anthracenediones.
  • A history of allergic reaction to cisplatin or other platinum containing compounds or doxorubicin.
  • Renal impairment, defined as \< 50 ml/min, ( Equation).
  • Myocardial insufficiency, defined as class > 2.
  • Impaired liver function defined as ≥ 1,5 x UNL (upper normal limit).
  • Inadequate haematological function defined as ANC ≤ 1.5 x 109/l and ≤ 100 x 109/l.
  • Any other condition or therapy, which in the investigator's opinion may pose a risk to the patient or interfere with the study objectives.
  • Previous intraabdominal chemotherapy or intraabdominal antibody therapy.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(8)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Cancer (malignancy)

Malignancy means cancer. Criteria about another or earlier malignancy ask whether you have had a different cancer, usually within a set number of years.

Some are commonly allowed, such as treated skin cancers other than melanoma and early cancers removed completely — check the exceptions this study lists.

Life expectancy

The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

GFR and eGFR (kidney filtering)

GFR (glomerular filtration rate) is how much blood the kidneys filter each minute. It is usually estimated from a blood test — eGFR, by formulas such as CKD-EPI or MDRD — and some studies ask for it to be measured directly instead. Usually given in mL/min/1.73 m².

Check the method, the units and the minimum the study states. A value of 90 or above is in the normal-or-high range, but kidney damage can show in other tests too.

Creatinine clearance (CrCl)

How quickly the kidneys clear creatinine, a waste product, from the blood. A study may estimate it from a blood test with age, weight and sex (often by the Cockcroft–Gault formula), or measure it using blood and urine collected over a set time. Given in mL/min; higher is better.

NYHA class (heart failure)

The New York Heart Association’s four classes of how much heart failure limits physical activity.

I
No limits: ordinary activity causes no undue tiredness or breathlessness.
II
Slight limits: comfortable at rest, ordinary activity causes symptoms.
III
Marked limits: comfortable at rest, less than ordinary activity causes symptoms.
IV
Symptoms even at rest; any activity makes them worse.

Studies set their own limit — many outside heart failure leave out class III–IV, while heart failure studies may ask for a particular class. Check the class this study names.

Bilirubin

A yellow substance made when red blood cells are broken down, which the liver clears. A high level can mean a problem with the liver or the bile ducts.

Criteria often allow more for people with Gilbert’s syndrome, a harmless inherited condition that raises bilirubin.

Platelets

Blood cells that help blood clot. Too few raises the risk of bleeding and bruising. A usual adult range is about 150–400 × 10⁹/L (150,000–400,000 per µL); each lab has its own reference range.

05

Study design

Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
35 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    PIPAC

    PIPAC with cisplatin (7.5mg/m2 in 150 ml saline) and doxorubicin (1.5mg/m2 in 50 ml saline) in patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) from any origin besides colorectal/appendiceal cancers in whom oxaliplatin (92mg/m2 in 150 ml dextrose) will be used. The aerosolised chemotherapy will be nebulized at a flow of 0.5ml/min at a maximum pressure of 200 PSI during a standard laparoscopy with an intraabdominal pressure of 12mmHg. The CO2 will be evacuated 30 minutes after administration of chemotherapy and the patient is closed similar to a standard laparoscopy.

    Drug: PIPAC

Interventions

  • DrugPIPAC

    Also known as: Cisplatin, Doxorubicin, Oxaliplatin

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of Patients with Adverse Events.

    No patients with adverse events above grade 3 on the CTCAE (Version 4) scale. No patients with complications above grade 2 on the Dindo-Clavien classification.

    Time frame: 5 months.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Occupational health.

    No detectable chemotherapy on environmental biomonitoring and blood samples from the surgeons and OR staff.

    Time frame: 5 months.

  2. Feasibility: Completion of procedure in 28:35

    Completion of procedure in 28:35.

    Time frame: 5 months.

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Odense University Hospital
    Odense, 5000, Denmark
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Sugarbaker PH. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy and cytoreductive surgery for the prevention and treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis and sarcomatosis. Semin Surg Oncol. 1998 Apr-May;14(3):254-61. doi: 10.1002/(sici)1098-2388(199804/05)14:33.0.co;2-u. PubMed 9548609 ↗
  • Coccolini F, Gheza F, Lotti M, Virzi S, Iusco D, Ghermandi C, Melotti R, Baiocchi G, Giulini SM, Ansaloni L, Catena F. Peritoneal carcinomatosis. World J Gastroenterol. 2013 Nov 7;19(41):6979-94. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v19.i41.6979. PubMed 24222942 ↗
  • Flessner MF. The transport barrier in intraperitoneal therapy. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005 Mar;288(3):F433-42. doi: 10.1152/ajprenal.00313.2004. PubMed 15692055 ↗
  • Dindo D, Demartines N, Clavien PA. Classification of surgical complications: a new proposal with evaluation in a cohort of 6336 patients and results of a survey. Ann Surg. 2004 Aug;240(2):205-13. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000133083.54934.ae. PubMed 15273542 ↗
  • Jacquet P, Stuart OA, Chang D, Sugarbaker PH. Effects of intra-abdominal pressure on pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of doxorubicin after intraperitoneal administration. Anticancer Drugs. 1996 Jul;7(5):596-603. doi: 10.1097/00001813-199607000-00016. PubMed 8862729 ↗
  • Tempfer CB, Celik I, Solass W, Buerkle B, Pabst UG, Zieren J, Strumberg D, Reymond MA. Activity of Pressurized Intraperitoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) with cisplatin and doxorubicin in women with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: preliminary clinical experience. Gynecol Oncol. 2014 Feb;132(2):307-11. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2013.11.022. Epub 2013 Nov 23. PubMed 24275155 ↗
  • Solass W, Kerb R, Murdter T, Giger-Pabst U, Strumberg D, Tempfer C, Zieren J, Schwab M, Reymond MA. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy of peritoneal carcinomatosis using pressurized aerosol as an alternative to liquid solution: first evidence for efficacy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014 Feb;21(2):553-9. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3213-1. Epub 2013 Sep 5. PubMed 24006094 ↗
  • Blanco A, Giger-Pabst U, Solass W, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Renal and hepatic toxicities after pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jul;20(7):2311-6. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2840-2. Epub 2013 Feb 3. PubMed 23377563 ↗
  • Solass W, Giger-Pabst U, Zieren J, Reymond MA. Pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC): occupational health and safety aspects. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Oct;20(11):3504-11. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-3039-x. Epub 2013 Jun 14. PubMed 23765417 ↗
  • Graversen M, Fristrup C, Kristensen TK, Larsen TR, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB, Detlefsen S. Detection of free intraperitoneal tumour cells in peritoneal lavage fluid from patients with peritoneal metastasis before and after treatment with pressurised intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). J Clin Pathol. 2019 May;72(5):368-372. doi: 10.1136/jclinpath-2018-205683. Epub 2019 Feb 12. PubMed 30755498 ↗
  • Graversen M, Detlefsen S, Bjerregaard JK, Fristrup CW, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Prospective, single-center implementation and response evaluation of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC) for peritoneal metastasis. Ther Adv Med Oncol. 2018 Jun 1;10:1758835918777036. doi: 10.1177/1758835918777036. eCollection 2018. PubMed 29899763 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Sep 12, 2017, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02320448
Lead sponsor
Michael Bau Mortensen
Responsible party
Michael Bau Mortensen (Professor, Odense University Hospital) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Dec 19, 2014
Start date
Mar 2015
Primary completion
Aug 2017
Completion
Aug 2017
Last update
Sep 12, 2017

Study contacts

Michael Mortensen, Professor
study director · Odense University Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Sep 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Studies of the drug tested here: Cisplatin

Start the discussion