Dataset Information

Trial protocol: a randomised controlled trial to verify the non-inferiority of a partially covered self-expandable metal stent to an uncovered self-expandable metal stent for biliary drainage during neoadjuvant therapy in patients with pancreatic cancer with obstructive jaundice (PUN-NAC trial).

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (NAC/NACRT) for resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic cancers was recently performed to improve clinical outcomes and led to good results, although it remains controversial whether NAC/NACRT is beneficial for resectable pancreatic cancer. A few recent studies revealed longer patency and lower cost related to the stent occlusion of a metal stent than those of a plastic stent during NAC/NACRT. It also remains controversial which type of self-expandable metal stent (SEMS) is the most suitable for patients with resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic cancer during NAC/NACRT: an uncovered SEMS (USEMS), a fully covered SEMS (FCSEMS) or a partially covered SEMS (PCSEMS). So far, two randomised controlled trials indicated that a USEMS and an FCSEMS were similar in preoperative stent dysfunction and adverse event rate. Thus, we aimed to verify the non-inferiority of a PCSEMS to a USEMS in this multicentre randomised controlled trial.

Methods and analysis

We designed a multicentre randomised controlled trial, for which we will recruit 100 patients with resectable/borderline resectable pancreatic cancer and distal biliary obstruction scheduled for NAC/NACRT from 13 high-volume institutions. Patients will be randomly allocated to the PCSEMS group or USEMS group. The primary outcome measure is the preoperative biliary event rate. Data will be analysed after completion of the study. We will calculate the 95% CIs of the incidence of preoperative biliary events in each group and analyse whether the difference between them is within the non-inferiority margin (10%).

Ethics and dissemination

This study has been approved by the institutional review board of Hokkaido University Hospital. The results will be submitted for presentation at an international medical conference and published in a peer-reviewed journal.

Trial registration number

UMIN000041737; jRCT1012200002.

SUBMITTER: Kuwatani M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8268904 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimTo compare the efficacy of using covered self-expandable metal stents (CSEMSs) and uncovered self-expandable metal stents (UCSEMSs) to treat objective jaundice caused by an unresectable malignant tumor.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive electronic search from 1980 to May 2015. All randomized controlled trials comparing the use of CSEMSs and UCSEMSs to treat malignant distal biliary obstruction were included.ResultsThe analysis included 1417 patients enrolled in 14 trials. We did not detect significant differences between the UCSEMS group and the CSEMS group in terms of cumulative stent patency (hazard ratio (HR) 0.93, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.19-4.53; p = 0.93, I2 = 0%), patient survival (HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.05-10.87; p = 0.85, I2 = 0%), overall stent dysfunction (relative ratio (RR) 0.85, M-H, random, 95% CI 0.57-1.25; p = 0.83, I2 = 63%), the overall complication rate (RR 1.26, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 0.94-1.68; p = 0.12, I2 = 0%) or the change in serum bilirubin (weighted mean difference (WMD) -0.13, IV fixed, 95% CI 0.56-0.3; p = 0.55, I2 = 0%). However, we did detect a significant difference in the main causes of stent dysfunction between the two groups. In particular, the CSEMS group exhibited a lower rate of tumor ingrowth (RR 0.25, M-H, random, 95% CI 0.12-0.52; p = 0.002, I2 = 40%) but a higher rate of tumor overgrowth (RR 1.76, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 1.03-3.02; p = 0.04, I2 = 0%). Patients with CSEMSs also exhibited a higher migration rate (RR 9.33, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 2.54-34.24; p = 0.008, I2 = 0%) and a higher rate of sludge formation (RR 2.47, M-H, fixed, 95% CI 1.36-4.50; p = 0.003, I2 = 0%).ConclusionsOur meta-analysis indicates that there is no significant difference in primary stent patency and stent dysfunction between CSEMSs and UCSEMSs during the period from primary stent insertion to primary stent dysfunction or patient death. However, when taking further management for occluded stents into consideration, CSEMSs is a better choice for patients with malignant biliary obstruction due to their removability.