AzTrials
AzTrials

Glioblastoma MultiformePhase 2NCT06356883

Intraarterial Carboplatin + Caelyx vs Intraarterial Carboplatin + Etoposide Phosphate for Progressing Glioblastoma

A Phase 2 study testing IA Carboplatin + IA Caelyx and IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide Phosphate in people with Glioblastoma Multiforme and Relapse, run by Université de Sherbrooke at 1 site in Canada.

Recruiting

Looking for participants now. Contact the study team or a site below to ask about taking part.

Sites and contacts
Official record
Search all trials

Trial summary

The standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM) treatment involves maximal resection followed by concomitant radiotherapy and temozolomide. Progression-free survival (PFS) with this treatment is only 6.9 months and relapse is inevitable. At relapse, there is no consensus regarding the optimal therapeutic strategy. Read more about this study

Who is it for?
Ages 18 years and older
Conditions the study is for
Glioblastoma Multiforme, Relapse
What is being tested?
IA Carboplatin + IA Caelyx and IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide Phosphate
Type of treatment
Injection or infusion
Could I receive a placebo?
No, everyone receives an active treatment
How many people
120 participants
Where
1 siteCanada
Study dates
Aug 2025to Apr 2028
Phase
Phase 2
Are there results?
Not yet: the study is under way

Key requirements

Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.

  • Ages 18 years and older
  • All sexes
  • No healthy volunteers
  • Adult, Older adult

Who may be able to join

  • Histological diagnosis of glioblastoma multiforme.
  • Radiological progression on an MRI scan, according to the RANO criteria, in the context of a known glioblastoma multiforme, already treated with the Stupp protocol of combined radiotherapy-Temozolomide. This implies a measurable disease on MRI.
  • Prior radiotherapy and temozolomide, as per the Stupp protocol, no sooner than 4 weeks, is permitted.
  • Eighteen or more years of age.
  • Performance status: Karnofsky ranging from 60 to 100%.
  • Haematopoietic parameters at recruitment:
Show all 22Show fewer
  • Platelet counts > 100,000/mm3.
  • Hemoglobin > 8 g/dL.
  • Absolute neutrophil count > 1,500/mm3.
  • No impaired bone marrow function.
  • Hepatic parameters at recruitment:
  • Bilirubin ≤ 2 times normal value.
  • AST and ALT ≤ 2 times upper limit of normal (ULN).
  • Alkaline phosphatase ≤ 2 times ULN (unless attributed to the tumour).
  • No impaired hepatic function.
  • Renal parameters at recruitment:
  • No impaired renal function.
  • Creatinine no greater than 1.5 fold of the normal value.
  • Creatinine clearance > 30 ml/min.
  • Normal ECG.
  • Written informed consent obtained.
  • Patients should be either sterile or else use a contraceptive strategy (for at least 2 months prior to study accruals).

Who cannot join

  • Presence of a severe psychiatric or medical condition that would interfere with treatment administration or study recruitment.
  • Presence of an active autoimmune disease.
  • No prior cardiac disease within the past 5 years OR LVEF of at least 50% at baseline ultrasound.
  • Occurrence of another malignancy within the past 5 years except curatively treated basal cell or squamous cell skin cancer or in situ cervical carcinoma.
  • Pregnancy (as confirmed by a positive b-HCG) or actively nursing.
  • Presence of an uncontrolled systemic infection.

Trial locations and contacts

1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.

Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
  • CHUS

    Sherbrooke, Quebec, J1H 5N4

    David Fortin, MD, 819-346-1110 ext. 13895, david.fortin@usherbrooke.ca

    Marie-Andrée Roy, Nurse, 819-346-1110 ext. 13895, marie-andree.roy.s-inf.ciussse-chus@ssss.gouv.qc.ca

    Recruiting

Other trials in Canada

About this study

Official title: A Randomized Phase II Study on Intraarterial Carboplatin Combined With Caelyx Compared to Intraarterial Carboplatin Combined With Etoposide Phosphate for Progressing Glioblastoma at First or Second Relapse

The standard of care for glioblastoma (GBM) treatment involves maximal resection followed by concomitant radiotherapy and temozolomide. Progression-free survival (PFS) with this treatment is only 6.9 months and relapse is inevitable. At relapse, there is no consensus regarding the optimal therapeutic strategy. The rationale behind the fact that limited chemotherapy agents are available in the treatment of malignant gliomas is related to the blood-brain barrier (BBB), which impedes drug entry to the brain. Intraarterial (IA) chemotherapy allows to circumvent this. Using IA delivery of carboplatin, can produce responses in 70% of patients for a median PFS of 5 months. Median survival from study entry was 11 months, whereas the overall survival (OS) 23 months. How can the OS and PFS be improved? By combining chemotherapeutic agents with different mechanisms of action.

Study design: In this phase II trial, treatment will be offered at relapse. Surgery will be performed for cytoreduction if it is warranted, followed with a combination IA carboplatin + IA Cealyx (liposomal doxorubicin) or IA carboplatin + IA etoposide phosphate. Toxicity will be assessed according to the NCIC common toxicity criteria. Treatment will consist in either IA carboplatin (400 mg/m^2) + IA Cealyx (30 mg/m^2) or IA carboplatin (400 mg/m^2) + IA etoposide phosphate (400 mg/m^2) every 4-6 weeks (1 cycle). Up to twelve cycles will be offered.

Read more

Outcome measurements: Tumor response will be evaluated using the RANO criteria by magnetic resonance imaging monthly. Primary outcome will PFS and tumor response. Secondary outcome will include median OS, toxicity, quality of life (QOL), neurocognition (NC).

Putting together these data will allow to correlate clinical and radiological response to QOL and NC.

Read the detailed description

BACKGROUND - Glioblastoma (GBM) is the most common and aggressive primary brain tumour in adults. The standard first-line treatment for these tumours features maximized surgery followed by radiation with concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide. The overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) observed in the clinic with this paradigm are only 14.6 and 6, 9 months respectively. One of the challenges in the treatment of this neoplasm stems from the severe tumour heterogeneity which translates into unpredictable treatment response. As a result, newly diagnosed tumours inevitably relapse after the standard first-line treatment, which is called the Stupp protocol which combines radiation therapy and oral temozolomide. When recurrence occurs, if the patient's functional status is adequate, this will mandate other therapeutic strategies. Interestingly, results obtained in most studies in this setting have been so marginal that there is literally no recognized optimal second and third line of treatment. Admittedly, the access to active therapies is greatly limited by the presence of the blood-brain barrier (BBB), which severely reduces the chemotherapy entry to the CNS.

When one realizes the extensiveness of the vascular network supplying the brain, it appears obvious that a global delivery strategy via this vascular network as a delivery corridor is credible and legitimate. The importance of this vascular system has already been detailed by Bradbury; the author claims that the entire network covers an area of 12 m2/g of cerebral parenchyma. To understand the extensiveness of the cerebral vascularization in a more prosaic way, let us just consider that the brain receives about 20% of the total systemic circulation although it weighs less than 3% of the total body weight.

The access to a patient's cerebral vascular network is technically easy and actually repeatedly performed in the clinic on a regular basis. Via a simple puncture to access the femoral artery, a catheter can be introduced and navigated intraarterially to reach one of the four major cerebral arteries. Once in the target vessel, a therapeutic agent can be administered via the catheter, that is later withdrawn at the conclusion of the procedure. The CIAC allows the construct of a regional chemotherapeutic distribution paradigm within the area irrigated by the targeted vessel.

An increase in the local plasma peak concentration of the drug yields a significantly improved AUC (concentration of drug according to the time) through the first pass effect. This consequently translates in an increased local exposure of the target tissue to the therapeutic agent. Interestingly, as our lab as shown, it is also accompanied by a decreased systemic drug distribution, hence reducing systemic toxicity and potential side effects. Consequently, the therapeutic concentration at the targeted tumour cells is increased by a 3.5 to 5-fold factor. This procedure is performed in the angiographic suite under local anesthesia and typically lasts around 45 minutes.

The IA procedure is a very safe procedure. Indeed, this procedure has been used at our institution for over 15 years using various chemotherapeutic agents and thus have precise statistics on the risks and complications. Indeed, 722 different patients have been treated adding up to 3600 procedures and have compiled the following events. During the MRI that followed the IA infusion, 66 complications were identified (1.84%), 27 of which were associated to symptoms (0.75%). During the infusion, 39 episodes of seizures occurred (1.08%), all of which were successfully controlled with anti-seizure medication. Moreover, a significant reduction in white, red or platelet blood cell count occurred in 52 patients during the treatment phase (7.2%). This study will investigate the efficacy of using combined chemotherapeutic agents described above. Our team currently uses intraarterial (IA) infusion to alleviate the effects of the BBB. This delivery strategy was shown to be well tolerated, triggered very few discomforts and side effects, and significantly improved survival. So much so, that it is nowadays considered a standard of care for relapsing tumours in our institution.

Like cisplatin, carboplatin is a molecule made of a platinum atom surrounded in a plane by two ammonia groups and two other ligands in the cis position. Unlike the chloride atoms found in cisplatin, the ligands in carboplatin are esther functional groups that form a ring structure. As such, carboplatin is more stable, causes less vomiting and is less neurotoxic, less ototoxic and less nephrotoxic. Carboplatin's exact mechanism of action remains unclear. However, it is well known that carboplatin is activated inside the cell into reactive platinum species. These reactive complexes react with DNA bases to create inter- and intrastrand crosslinks which prevent cell division by hindering DNA synthesis.

At our institution, carboplatin is the primary chemotherapeutic agent for IA infusions and yields positive tumour responses in 70% of patients for a median PFS of 5 months. Although interesting, there is obviously room for improvement in the care of these patients. Hence the current proposal.

For patients in which carboplatin fails, other chemotherapeutics are chosen arbitrarily from a list of agents available for IA infusion. As such, our team has successfully treated relapsing GBM patients with IA delivery of methotrexate, melphalan, etoposide phosphate or Caelyx (liposomal doxorubicin). At the heart of the present study, carboplatin, which will be combined with either one of two agents found to be ideally suited in this setting: Caelyx (liposomal doxorubicin) or etoposide phosphate.

Doxorubicin is an anthracycline, an antineoplastic antibiotic developed from Streptomyces peucetius subsp. Cassius. It is a very potent antitumour agent and is considered one of the most active antineoplastic drugs developed to date. Its effect is produced via different mechanisms: DNA binding and cross-linking, interference with DNA strand separation, inhibition of RNA polymerase, inhibition of topoisomerase II, formation of free radicals and membrane peroxidation have all been suggested.

In vitro studies in malignant glial cell lines have demonstrated that doxorubicin induces a halt in cell growth within 24 hours, and results in apoptosis within 48 hours. It has been identified as one of the most potent chemotherapeutic drugs against malignant glioma cell lines in vitro. However, in vivo, the use of doxorubicin is limited by its inability to cross the BBB.

Doxorubicin is rapidly distributed in the body tissues, and binds to plasma protein and cell membranes. The clinical application of this agent is unfortunately limited by its dose-related side effects such as cardiotoxicity and myleotoxicity.

Caelyx is a chlorhydrate of doxorubicin encapsulated within a pegylated liposome. The liposomal formulation of doxorubicin (Caelyx) exhibits an altered pharmacokinetic profile favouring the use of this drug formulation in brain tumour treatment. It has a longer terminal half-life than free doxorubicin, and reaches greater concentration in the tumour. Because of a decreased uptake by the reticuloendothelial system, the drug remains in circulation much longer. This seems to be especially true in glioblastoma, where it tends to accumulate in significant concentration due to the increase in neovascularisation. This has been shown in experimental settings, as well as in the clinic. Interestingly, because of its altered pharmacokinetic properties, it also presents a reduced toxicity profile. The liposomal formulation of doxorubicin causes less myelosuppression, nausea, vomiting and alopecia than standard doxorubicin. The cardiotoxicity is also reduced.

However, even with the greater accumulation of the drug in the tumour cells, its rate of BBB penetration when administered via IV infusion remains a limiting factor. Indeed, it is too low to yield a significant concentration accumulation within the tumour site to produce a therapeutic benefit.

Etoposide phosphate (Etopophos; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Princeton, NJ) is a water-soluble prodrug of etoposide that is rapidly and completely converted to the parent compound after intravenous dosing. The pharmacokinetic profile of either etoposide or etoposide phosphate is identical. Toxicity and clinical activity are also the same. Since etoposide phosphate is water soluble, solutions of up to 20 mg/mL can be prepared. However, in high doses, it can only be given as a 5-minute bolus, in small volumes and as a continuous infusion. Furthermore, it is not formulated with polyethylene glycol, polysorbate 80 (Tween; ICI Americas, Wilmington, DE), and ethanol, and does not cause acidosis when given at high doses. The easier-to-use etoposide phosphate represents an improved formulation of etoposide.

Classically, etoposide must be diluted prior to use with sodium chloride (0.9% w/v) or glucose (5% w/v) solutions to concentration of 0.2 mg/mL (i.e., 1 ml of concentrate in 100 ml of vehicle) up to 0.4 mg/mL (i.e., 2 ml of concentrate in 100 ml of vehicle). Evidently, this cannot be something considered in a setting of IA administration, as the volume administered would be excessive. Hence, the use of etoposide phosphate, for which 100-fold increased concentration can be prepared in a volume accessible for an IA administration: 200 cc.

STUDY DESIGN - This clinical trial will be an open label randomized phase II study in which intraarterial administration of carboplatin (400 mg/m2) combined with Caelyx (30 mg/m2) will be compared with intraarterial administration of carboplatin (400 mg/m2) combined with etoposide phosphate (400 mg/m2). Patients that have failed the standard first line of treatment (Stupp protocol) and that are diagnosed with recurrent GBM will be randomly distributed to one of the two second-line treatment paradigms using the block randomization method. Each recruited patient will undergo maximal resection before beginning treatments. Treatment cycles will be administered on a monthly basis until a progression is identified on the magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scan or until a total of 12 cycles have been completed. The cohort will count 120 patients that will be divided into two groups of 60 patients receiving one of the two chemotherapeutic combinations. As to which of the two combinations will be best remains to be determined. For that reason, data from our latest published clinical trial and patients treated with intraarterial carboplatin at our institution will be used as benchmarks for baseline comparisons (OS of 11 months and PFS of 5 months from study entry).

AIM - By using carboplatin in combination with Caelyx or etoposide phosphate in the setting of an IA infusion, our intention is to optimally deliver carboplatin-based chemotherapy combinations to the brain beyond the BBB, and more specifically to the tumour cells.

HYPOTHESES - In patients treated with either combination, our prediction is that this will lead to an improved tumour response and control rate, with minimal impact on the quality of life. Our preliminary clinical data seems to support this hypothesis.

Being tested
IA Carboplatin + IA Caelyx, IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide Phosphate
Medical subject headings
Glioblastoma, Recurrence

What participants receive

What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.

  • IA Carboplatin + IA CaelyxDrug

    Intraarterial infusion of carboplatin combined with liposomal doxorubicin

  • IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide PhosphateDrug

    Intraarterial infusion of carboplatin combined with etoposide phosphate

Study groups in NCT06356883
Study groupRoleWhat they receive
IA Carboplatin + IA CaelyxExperimentalParticipants will be treated with IA carboplatin + IA liposomal doxorubicin on each cycle (4-6 weeks), for up to 12 cycles.
Receives: Drug: IA Carboplatin + IA Caelyx
IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide PhosphateExperimentalParticipants will be treated with IA carboplatin + IA etoposide phosphate on each cycle (4-6 weeks), for up to 12 cycles.
Receives: Drug: IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide Phosphate

What is being measured

The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.

  1. Tumor Response on MRI using the RANO Criteria

    T1 +/- contrast agent , T2 and FLAIR

    Measured: Every 4 weeks until progression per RANO criteria; up to 12 months

  2. Progression-free Survival

    Time elapsed between study entry and progression

    Measured: When radiological progression per RANO criteria is reported; through study completion, an average of 6 months

Secondary outcomes (4)
  1. Median overall survival

    Time elapsed between initial diagnosis and death

    Measured: When death is reported; through study completion, an average of 2 years

  2. Treatment-related toxicity

    Recording of adverse events

    Measured: When hematological or non-hematological events are reported, through study completion, an average of 2 year

  3. Per treatment quality of life assessment

    SNAS questionnaire (Sherbrooke neuro assessment scale for quality of life). Scale ranges from 30 to 120; the lower scores indicate better quality of life

    Measured: Every 4 weeks until progression per RANO criteria; up to 12 months

  4. Incidence of treatment related Neurocognitive decline

    MOCA questionnaire (Montreal Cognitive Assessment)

    Measured: Every 4 weeks until progression per RANO criteria; up to 12 months

Timeline

From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.

  1. First posted10 Apr 2024
  2. Study startAug 2025 (estimated)
  3. Primary completionApr 2027 (estimated)
  4. Study completionApr 2028 (estimated)

Resources

More details

For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.

Study design
Study type
Interventional
Phase
Phase 2
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomised
Intervention model
Parallel groups
Masking
None (open label)
Enrolment
120 participants (estimated)
IDs, dates and publications
ClinicalTrials.gov ID
NCT06356883
Sponsor's protocol ID
2024-4938
Status last verified
Aug 2025
First submitted
19 Mar 2024
Last updated
7 Aug 2025
Results posted
No
Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
Individual data sharing
No

Publications

  • Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, Belanger K, Brandes AA, Marosi C, Bogdahn U, Curschmann J, Janzer RC, Ludwin SK, Gorlia T, Allgeier A, Lacombe D, Cairncross JG, Eisenhauer E, Mirimanoff RO; European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Brain Tumor and Radiotherapy Groups; National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005 Mar 10;352(10):987-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa043330.

    PubMed 15758009
  • Kroll RA, Neuwelt EA. Outwitting the blood-brain barrier for therapeutic purposes: osmotic opening and other means. Neurosurgery. 1998 May;42(5):1083-99; discussion 1099-100. doi: 10.1097/00006123-199805000-00082.

    PubMed 9588554
  • Bradbury MW. The developing experimental approach to the idea of a blood-brain barrier. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1986;481:137-41. doi: 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1986.tb27146.x. No abstract available.

    PubMed 3468853
  • Fortin D, Salame JA, Desjardins A, Benko A. Technical modification in the intracarotid chemotherapy and osmotic blood-brain barrier disruption procedure to prevent the relapse of carboplatin-induced orbital pseudotumor. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2004 May;25(5):830-4.

    PubMed 15140730
  • Newton HB, Slivka MA, Volpi C, Bourekas EC, Christoforidis GA, Baujan MA, Slone W, Chakeres DW. Intra-arterial carboplatin and intravenous etoposide for the treatment of metastatic brain tumors. J Neurooncol. 2003 Jan;61(1):35-44. doi: 10.1023/a:1021218207015.

    PubMed 12587794
  • Newton HB, Figg GM, Slone HW, Bourekas E. Incidence of infusion plan alterations after angiography in patients undergoing intra-arterial chemotherapy for brain tumors. J Neurooncol. 2006 Jun;78(2):157-60. doi: 10.1007/s11060-005-9080-2. Epub 2006 Apr 14.

    PubMed 16614945
  • Drapeau A, Fortin D. Chemotherapy Delivery Strategies to the Central Nervous System: neither Optional nor Superfluous. Curr Cancer Drug Targets. 2015;15(9):752-68. doi: 10.2174/1568009615666150616123548.

    PubMed 26077730
  • Go RS, Adjei AA. Review of the comparative pharmacology and clinical activity of cisplatin and carboplatin. J Clin Oncol. 1999 Jan;17(1):409-22. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.1.409.

    PubMed 10458260
  • Fortin D, Morin PA, Belzile F, Mathieu D, Pare FM. Intra-arterial carboplatin as a salvage strategy in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma multiforme. J Neurooncol. 2014 Sep;119(2):397-403. doi: 10.1007/s11060-014-1504-4. Epub 2014 Jun 20.

    PubMed 24947313
  • Wagner S, Peters O, Fels C, Janssen G, Liebeskind AK, Sauerbrey A, Suttorp M, Hau P, Wolff JE. Pegylated-liposomal doxorubicin and oral topotecan in eight children with relapsed high-grade malignant brain tumors. J Neurooncol. 2008 Jan;86(2):175-81. doi: 10.1007/s11060-007-9444-x. Epub 2007 Jul 20.

    PubMed 17641821
  • Wolff JE, Trilling T, Molenkamp G, Egeler RM, Jurgens H. Chemosensitivity of glioma cells in vitro: a meta analysis. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1999 Aug-Sep;125(8-9):481-6. doi: 10.1007/s004320050305.

    PubMed 10480340
  • Bradford R, Koppel H, Pilkington GJ, Thomas DG, Darling JL. Heterogeneity of chemosensitivity in six clonal cell lines derived from a spontaneous murine astrocytoma and its relationship to genotypic and phenotypic characteristics. J Neurooncol. 1997 Sep;34(3):247-61. doi: 10.1023/a:1005704223040.

    PubMed 9258817
  • Shen F, Chu S, Bence AK, Bailey B, Xue X, Erickson PA, Montrose MH, Beck WT, Erickson LC. Quantitation of doxorubicin uptake, efflux, and modulation of multidrug resistance (MDR) in MDR human cancer cells. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2008 Jan;324(1):95-102. doi: 10.1124/jpet.107.127704. Epub 2007 Oct 18.

    PubMed 17947497
  • Koukourakis MI, Koukouraki S, Fezoulidis I, Kelekis N, Kyrias G, Archimandritis S, Karkavitsas N. High intratumoural accumulation of stealth liposomal doxorubicin (Caelyx) in glioblastomas and in metastatic brain tumours. Br J Cancer. 2000 Nov;83(10):1281-6. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2000.1459.

    PubMed 11044350
  • Fortin D. [The blood-brain barrier should not be underestimated in neuro-oncology]. Rev Neurol (Paris). 2004 May;160(5 Pt 1):523-32. doi: 10.1016/s0035-3787(04)70981-9. French.

    PubMed 15269669

Questions about this trial

What is this clinical trial studying?

A Phase 2 study testing IA Carboplatin + IA Caelyx and IA Carboplatin + IA Etoposide Phosphate in people with Glioblastoma Multiforme and Relapse, run by Université de Sherbrooke at 1 site in Canada.

The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.

Who may be eligible to take part?

The sponsor lists 22 inclusion and 6 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.

Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?

The record says: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Aug 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.

Where is the study taking place?

The record lists 1 site in Canada. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.

What are the possible benefits and risks?

They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.

What does this phase mean?

Phase 2 studies give the treatment to a larger group to see whether it has the intended effect and to keep checking safety.

Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.

Are results available for this study?

This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.

How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?

Contact David Fortin, MD (819-346-1110 ext. 13895, david.fortin@usherbrooke.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.

What does the primary outcome measure?

Tumor Response on MRI using the RANO Criteria (time frame: Every 4 weeks until progression per RANO criteria; up to 12 months). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.

Where can I read the original study information?

On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT06356883, which also lists 19 linked publications.

Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?

No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.

How often is this information updated?

AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 7 Aug 2025; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.

Free account

Log in to keep searching

You’ve used your 3 free searches. AzTrials is free: log in or create a free account to keep searching clinical trials and save the ones you want to follow.

Create a free accountLog in