ClinicalTrials.gg
CompletedNCT03287375PIPAC-OPC2Updated Oct 7, 2022

Treatment of Peritoneal Carcinomatosis With Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy -

A Phase 2 interventional study of PIPAC in Peritoneum; Carcinomatosis, Peritoneal Neoplasms and Peritoneal Metastases, sponsored by Michael Bau Mortensen. Completed at 1 site in Denmark. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2022-10-07.

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

From the registry’s dates

  • Registered 9 months after the study started (first participant enrolled Dec 2016, registered Sep 2017).
Phase
Phase 2
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
143
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
Largest of 14
143 · median 27
Started
2016
with 2 others
Phase 2
8 of 14
2 open now
Registered
9th of 14
by date
Lead sponsor
2 of 14
Michael Bau Mortensen

Among the 14 studies testing cisplatin in Peritoneal Neoplasms, this one has the largest enrollment, is one of 3 that started in 2016, is one of 8 in phase 2, and was the 9th 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. 3 started in 2016.

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 study, where the efficacy of Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) against peritoneal metastases will be evaluated. Furthermore, this study will focus on the best evaluation method, where both Quality of Life questionnaires, repeated histology, cytology and MRI will be used.

Read the detailed description

Patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) will be reviewed by the interdisciplinary tumor board and included based on predefined in- and exclusion criteria. Eligible candidates with primary colorectal or appendiceal cancers will be treated with intraperitoneal oxaliplatin delivered by the PIPAC procedure, while patients with other primary cancers will be treated with a combination of cisplatin and doxorubicin. Three PIPAC treatments will be scheduled in intervals of 4-6 weeks (6-7 if combined with systemic chemotherapy). MRI and QoL questionnaires will be performed at baseline and after three PIPAC treatments. If the patients respond to the PIPAC treatment, further courses of PIPAC can be planned at the tumour board meeting.

In brief, PIPAC is performed during a standard laparoscopy using two access ports, where the magnitude of PM is evaluated using the Peritoneal Carcinosis Index and the Dutch 7 regions count. Afterwards, the peritoneum is biopsied at different regions and peritoneal lavage fluid is sent for cytology. Then, chemotherapy is aerosolised within the abdomen, and after 30 minutes, the aerosol has been absorbed by the peritoneum, and the patient is closed according to departmental guidelines. The patients are expectedly discharged within 24 hours, and will after each PIPAC treatment be screened for adverse events using the CTCAE and Dindo-Clavien classification.

Amendment 23-03-2020:

Title Evaluation of the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score in biopsies from clips marked peritoneal metastases compared to biopsies from the element with most malignant features during repeated Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy

Background Patients with peritoneal metastases (PM) may be treated with protocolled Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) at Odense PIPAC Center by inclusion in the prospective PIPAC-OPC2 study. The response evaluation is based on repeated biopsies from clips marked PM elements retrieved during each PIPAC procedure. Histological regression is categorized by the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score (PRGS). While the PRGS is internationally validated and accepted, there is a lack of consensus regarding the biopsy strategy during subsequent PIPAC procedures. As part of the PIPAC-OPC2 protocol, we define the element with most malignant features in each of the four abdominal quadrants during the first PIPAC procedure. We clips mark these elements to be able to take biopsies from the same area during subsequent procedures, thus reducing sampling error. At other centres, the biopsies are taken from those elements that are most suspicious of malignancy at visual inspection during each PIPAC.

The question is whether the histological regression in repeated biopsies from clips marked elements is influenced by fibrosis from the clips or dominated by scar tissue induced by the biopsy per se. Moreover, it is possible that PMs may progress in unmarked areas, in spite of regression in the marked areas. Hypothetically, this could lead to false positive regression, thus overestimating the histological response to PIPAC.

Objective To investigate if the histologically assessed response to PIPAC is dependent on the biopsy strategy: Biopsies taken from those areas that are most suspicious of malignancy at visual inspection compared to re-biopsies of the same, clips marked PM elements during the second PIPAC procedure.

Number of patients Data from 131 consecutive patients included in the PIPAC-OPC1 or PIPAC-OPC2 studies show that 67% had more than one PIPAC procedure. The mean PRGS was reduced by 0.38 points (SD 0.65) from PIPAC 1 to PIPAC 2, based on re-biopsies from clips marked elements.

With an alpha of 0.05 and a power of 0.80, 25 patients are needed to test the null hypothesis of no difference between the two biopsy strategies. Patients are their own control.

Methods The present study is an amendment to the PIPAC-OPC2 study. To date, 101/137 patient have been included. With an expected study termination of no more than 30% of the patients before PIPAC 2, this amendment is feasible within the framework of the PIPAC-OPC2 study.

A clips marked element is defined as the area covered within two times the length of the opened jaws of a biopsy forceps. An external surgical oncologist with vast experience of staging cancer patients will define the PM element with most malignant features before retrieval of biopsies during the second PIPAC procedure. Accordingly, biopsies will then be taken from the clips marked elements and the defined element with most malignant features (potentially same element). The pathologist will be blinded during the analyses of biopsies from the second PIPAC procedure.

03

Conditions studied

  • Peritoneum; Carcinomatosis
  • Peritoneal Neoplasms
  • Peritoneal Metastases
  • Chemotherapy Effect
  • Chemotherapeutic Toxicity
  • Quality of Life
  • Histologic Progression

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 gastrointestinal-, ovarian- or primary peritoneal (based on tissue from the primary tumor and/or its ).
  • Ovarian cancer patients must be platinum resistant and have completed at least one for platinum resistant disease.
  • Radiological, histological or cytological evidence of PC.
  • No indication for CRS and HIPEC (according to National Guidelines).
  • Performance status 0-1.
  • No more than a single extra-peritoneal metastasis.
  • Age > 18 years.
  • Females must be
  • Written must be obtained according to the local Ethics Committee requirements.

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Symptomatic small bowel obstruction (i.e. 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 platinum containing compounds or doxorubicin.
  • Renal impairment, defined as \< 40 ml/min, ( Equation).
  • Myocardial insufficiency, defined as class > 2.
  • Impaired liver function defined as ≥ 1.5 x UNL (upper normal limit).
  • Inadequate hematological function defined as ANC ≤ 1.5 x 109/l and ≤ 100 x109/l.
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(10)

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.

Metastases

Cancer that has spread from where it began to other parts of the body. “Metastatic” cancer is cancer that has spread this way.

Line of therapy

A line of therapy is one course of treatment, which may combine several drugs. First-line is the first course given; second-line follows when that stops working or is not tolerated.

“Two prior lines” means two courses that count separately under the study’s rules — not simply two drugs. Ask the study team if you are unsure how yours are counted.

Postmenopausal

Periods have stopped for good: usually no period for 12 months in a row without another medical reason, sometimes confirmed by a blood test (FSH).

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
143 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    PIPAC

    Peritoneal metastases (PM) from colorectal or appendiceal cancer will be treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) using oxaliplatin 92 mg/m2 in 150 ml dextrose. Peritoneal metastases (PM) from other GI or gynecologic cancers will be treated with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) using cisplatin 7.5 mg/m2 in 150 ml saline combined with doxorubicin 1.5 mg/m2 in 50 ml saline. PIPAC is performed during a standard laparoscopy with a capnoperitoneum of 12 mmHg and the aerosolised chemotherapy will be nebulized at a maximum pressure of 200 PSI and a flow rate of 0.5 ml/min. There is no upper number of allowed PIPAC treatments, but they will be planned in series of 3 with 4-6 weeks interval (6-7 weeks if combined with systemic chemotherapy).

    Drug: PIPAC

Interventions

  • DrugPIPAC

    Also known as: Cisplatin, Doxorubicin, Oxaliplatin

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Number of patients with major/complete histologic response (PRGS 1+2) peritoneal biopsies, within a series of three PIPAC procedures.

    Objective Tumor response will be evaluated by the Peritoneal Regression Grading Score based on repeated peritoneal biopsies during each PIPAC procedure.

    Time frame: 4 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. Number of patients with improved Quality of Life (QoL)

    Based on EORTC QLQC30 questionnaire at baseline and after 3 PIPAC treatments

    Time frame: 4 years

  2. Number of patients where MRI is accurate in describing PM distribution and progressive/regressive disease

    Based on MRI of the abdomen at baseline and after 3 PIPAC treatments, it will be evaluated, whether MRI can detect PM and whether MRI can be used to evaluate progression/regression during PIPAC treatment. Comparative gold standard is laparoscopy including biopsies

    Time frame: 4 years

07

Study locations

1 site
  • Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital
    Odense, 5000, Denmark
08

References and documents

Publications

  • 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 ↗
  • 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, 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, Lundell L, Fristrup C, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy (PIPAC) as an outpatient procedure. Pleura Peritoneum. 2018 Nov 27;3(4):20180128. doi: 10.1515/pp-2018-0128. eCollection 2018 Dec 1. PubMed 30911669 ↗
  • Graversen M, Detlefsen S, Asmussen J, Mahdi B, Fristrup C, Pfeiffer P, Mortensen MB. Treatment of peritoneal carcinomatosis with Pressurized IntraPeritoneal Aerosol Chemotherapy - PIPAC-OPC2. Pleura Peritoneum. 2018 Jun 9;3(2):20180108. doi: 10.1515/pp-2018-0108. eCollection 2018 Jun 1. PubMed 30911656 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No — Publications and presentations will be based on patient data, but the database is not open to other researchers.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 7, 2022, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03287375
Lead sponsor
Michael Bau Mortensen
Responsible party
Michael Bau Mortensen (Professor, Odense University Hospital) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Sep 19, 2017
Start date
Dec 1, 2016
Primary completion
Feb 1, 2022
Completion
Oct 1, 2022
Last update
Oct 7, 2022

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
Yes
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Oct 2022. 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