Evaluating Interventional Radiology for Cancer Pain Management

Official title

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Interventional Radiology in the Management of Pain in Patients With Cancer

Overview

Each year, the number of new cancer cases increases globally and the associated pain remains a major concern. The scientific literature shows that the prevalence and severity of cancer-related pain have decreased thanks to new therapeutic strategies and the efficacy of innovative treatments. Nevertheless, recent studies indicate that the prevalence of pain in patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer remains high. Cancer-related pain presents various characteristics, both in terms of timing (inflammatory and mechanical) and types (nociceptive, neuropathic, mixed, or visceral). This diversity in presentation and pathophysiology makes the condition complex, both in terms of symptom assessment and therapeutic management, requiring a multidisciplinary and often multimodal approach. In addition to pharmacological approaches, several non-pharmacological techniques are used for this purpose, as the interventional radiology (IR), so-called minimally invasive technique. The role of IR is becoming increasingly important in pain management, particularly in the context of a growing number of cancer survivors, improved survival in the metastatic setting and the limited effectiveness of opioids. These techniques include neurolysis, embolization, consolidation techniques, ablation, and percutaneous cervical cordotomy. The objective of the RI-Lief study is to evaluate the impact of interventional radiology on improving the quality of life of patients with locally advanced or metastatic cancer. As part of the study, interventional radiology will be included in the standard patient care. The only additional procedure introduced by the research is the administration of questionnaires.

Interventions

• Other Self-reported questionnaires
  Self-reported questionnaires will be used to assess the patient's pain (using a Numerical Rating Scale and Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory), satisfaction with pain management (Pain Treatment Satisfactory Scale) and the global quality of life (EORTC QLQ-C30 questionnaire)

Primary outcome measures

• Difference in pain intensity measured on a numerical scale before the interventional radiology procedure, and at 7 days, 1 month, and 3 months afterward. [Time frame: Baseline, 7 days, 1 month and 3 months after the radiology intervention.]

Eligibility criteria

Inclusion criteria

• Adult patient (age > 18 years);
• Patient with locally advanced or metastatic cancer undergoing active management, including palliative care;
• Patient with a clinically estimated life expectancy of at least 3 months;
• Patient receiving treatment with chemotherapy, immunotherapy, targeted therapy, hormone therapy, or any other type of treatment for locally advanced or metastatic cancer;
• Patient undergoing an interventional radiology procedure for pain relief (including cases where pain relief is not the primary objective);
• Patient able to complete the proposed questionnaires.

Exclusion criteria

• Patient with cancer in remission;
• Patient with cured cancer;
• Patient under routine follow-up.

Criteria are shown verbatim from the registry (in English). Final eligibility is always assessed by the study center.

Healthy volunteers: No

Study design

Allocation

N/A

Model

Single group

Masking

Open label

Primary purpose

Other

Study locations

Center list to be confirmed — check the primary protocol.

Identifiers

NCT: NCT07529314 · 69HCL25_1073

Primary sources (government registries)

• ClinicalTrials.gov (US NIH)

View this study on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗