An interventional study of External beam radiotherapy in Haemoptysis, sponsored by University of Stellenbosch. Status unknown at 1 site in South Africa. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-10-26.
Sponsored by University of Stellenbosch · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment
The sequelae of tuberculosis are still the commonest causes of haemoptysis in the developing world, where life-threatening haemoptysis remains a common and not infrequently fatal medical emergency. Haemoptysis can be life-threatening either as a result of compromised gas exchange or because of circulatory collapse secondary to acute blood loss. Haemodynamic and ventilatory support, followed by bronchial artery embolisation (BAE) as a bridge to potentially curative treatment such as lung resection, remains the standard of care. Often patients do not qualify for surgical intervention and BAE is, at best, a temporary solution. External beam radiotherapy (EBRT) may be an alternative, curative intervention in the management of haemoptysis in patients with no alternative options. There is a paucity of studies reporting the use of EBRT in patients without malignancy and with regards to specific doses of EBRT. This pilot study aims to explore the potential of varying doses of EBRT in the management of massive haemoptysis.
Currently the best curative treatment of massive haemoptysis is surgical resection of the affected portion of lung. For patients who do not qualify for surgery, there are few alternative interventions, most of which only provide a temporary solution.
Surgical resection of the diseased areas, which offers the possibility of cure, is best performed as an elective procedure. It carries a not insignificant mortality, with reports varying between 1% and 50%. Unfortunately, many patients admitted to Tygerberg Academic Hospital, are not candidates for either elective or emergency surgical resection. The most common reasons for inoperability are: irresectable disease (i.e. damage to the lungs is bilateral and too extensive to allow resection, or the site of bleeding is not known); or severely reduced cardiopulmonary reserves secondary to extensive pre-existing lung damage, making lung resection surgery impossible due to excessively high mortality risk.
Repeat BAE (as a palliative measure in inoperable cases) is not always technically feasible and does not always lead to cessation of the bleeding. Additionally long term recurrence rates following BAE are variable estimated at between 18-42%, and carries a high mortality.
A significant number of patients with massive haemoptysis do not qualify for either surgery or BAE, thus rendering them without treatment option, save palliation with long-term opiates. Their fate is that of recurrent haemoptysis and a high associated mortality. Endobronchial occluding devices have been considered, however their high cost and required expertise prohibits their extensive use.
A novel treatment of this condition potentially is external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). A case report of five patients has documented EBRT in the setting of mycetoma where between 7 and 14Gy was used, with cessation of life threatening haemoptysis. However follow-up was limited to 6 months, and the effects of EBRT in the setting of post-tuberculous structural lung disease without mycetoma is not known. The potential mechanism of the achieved haemostasis was speculated as being the induction of radiation damage to the radiosensitive capillaries, with subsequent inflammatory response, in keeping with previous rat models of lung perfusion following high dose (30Gy) EBRT exposure.
There is therefore a paucity of data on the utility of EBRT in benign conditions such bronchiectasis and aspergillomata. Furthermore due to the different effects, particularly temporal, the radiation has on normal and benign conditions it is difficult to extrapolate from the malignant scenario to the benign. Laboratory studies have however demonstrated the effects of high dose radiation on tissue that may result in a reduced bleeding tendency.
This study aims to explore a novel therapeutic strategy for patients with life-threatening haemoptysis who are not candidates for definitive management (i.e. lung resection). This study also aims to establish if there is a measurable response to varying doses of chest radiation in cases of haemoptysis caused by benign conditions.
This study is a prospective randomised control-intervention study. Patients will be allocated to one of 2 arms (control and EBRT at 3.5Gy weekly for 5 fractions to a maximum of 17G). The primary outcome will be time to recurrent haemoptysis. Secondary outcomes include physical performance, lung function and the occurrence of EBRT complications. Patients will be followed up daily whilst in hospital and for one year post intervention.
Assessors and those performing the statistical analysis will be blinded to the group allocation. Statistical analysis will include univariate and multivariate analysis with appropriate parametric or non-parametric tests. Appropriate tests for categorical data (e.g. Chi-squared test) and continuous data (e.g. Kruskal-Wallis, and ANOVA) will be used. Logistic and linear regression modelling will be used for certain outcomes, and multivariate analysis will be performed using step-wise regression modelling and full modelling where appropriate.
37 studies on the registry are indexed under Hemoptysis; 6 are open to participants now.
This study's planned enrollment of 40 is below the median of 73 across 20 interventional studies indexed under Hemoptysis.
Browse Hemoptysis studies →University of Stellenbosch is the lead sponsor of 34 studies on the registry; 3 are open to participants now.
Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.
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.
Exclusion Criteria:
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.
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.
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.
Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.
Patients will receive radiotherapy (3.5Gy weekly for 5 fractions to a maximum of 17G) prescribed to a central plane using mega-voltage radiation encompassing all the assessed affected lung tissue
Radiation: External beam radiotherapy
Patients will receive best medical care.
External beam radiotherapy will be prescribed to a central plane using mega-voltage radiation encompassing all the assessed affected lung tissue at 3.5Gy weekly for 5 fractions to a maximum of 17G
Composite end-point of time to recurrent life-threatening haemoptysis, or death
Time frame: 1 year
Six minute walk test
Improvement from baseline
Time frame: 1 year
Time to massive haemoptysis (>200mL per day)
Time frame: 1 year
Fev1/FVC
Improvement from baseline
Time frame: 1 year
Total lung capacity (TLC) Total lung capacity (TLC)
Improvement from baseline
Time frame: 1 year
Diffusion capacity (DLCO) Total lung capacity (TLC)
Improvement from baseline
Time frame: 1 year
Radiological change in volume (maximum diameters in three planes)
Performed by two radiologists to determine the radiological resolution of aspergillomata
Time frame: 1 year
Number of complications associated with Radiotherapy
nausea, skin changes, pulmonary infection, pain etc.
Time frame: 1 year
Plan to share: No
The record gives a start of Jun 2016, a primary completion of Mar 2018 and a completion of Mar 2019. It does not say whether these dates are actual or estimated.
How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.
This study is status unknown, as verified in Oct 2017. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.
Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.
Sign in to followQuestions 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.
University of Stellenbosch