A Phase III Study of Radium-223 Dichloride in Patients With Symptomatic Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer With Skeletal Metastases (ALSYMPCA)

• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00699751
• Recruitment Status: Completed
• First Posted: June 18, 2008
• Results First Posted: May 7, 2014
• Last Update Posted: May 27, 2016
• Sponsor: Bayer
• Information provided by (Responsible Party): Bayer

Study Description

Brief Summary:

ALSYMPCA (ALpharadin in SYMPtomatic Prostate CAncer) is an international Phase III clinical study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Radium-223 dichloride in patients with hormone refractory prostate cancer and skeletal metastases.

Condition or disease	Intervention/treatment	Phase
Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer; Bone Metastases	Drug: Radium-223 dichloride (Xofigo, BAY88-8223); Drug: Placebo; Drug: Best standard of care (BSoC)	Phase 3

Detailed Description:

The aim of the study was to compare, in patients with symptomatic hormone refractory prostate cancer (HRPC) and skeletal metastases, the efficacy of best standard of care plus Radium-223 dichloride versus best standard of care plus placebo, with the primary efficacy endpoint being overall survival (OS).

Patients were randomised in a 2:1 allocation ratio (Radium-223 dichloride:Placebo). The study treatment consisted of 6 intravenous administrations of Radium-223 dichloride or placebo (saline) each separated by an interval of 4 weeks. The patient were followed until 3 years after first study drug administration.

Within the U.S., the trial was conducted under an IND sponsored by Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

All patients received BSoC (Best Standard of Care).

This study has the original PCD as 14 October 2010, when a total of 316 deaths had been observed; this resulted in the Independent Data Monitoring Committee's (IDMC's) recommendation to stop the study as the primary efficacy analysis of overall survival had crossed the pre-specified boundary for efficacy. Later an updated analysis of primary endpoint in the first addendum was done with cut-off of 15 July 2011.

Study Design

• Study Type: Interventional (Clinical Trial)
• Actual Enrollment: 921 participants
• Allocation: Randomized
• Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
• Masking: Quadruple (Participant, Care Provider, Investigator, Outcomes Assessor)
• Primary Purpose: Treatment
• Official Title: A Double-blind, Randomised, Multiple Dose, Phase III, Multicentre Study of Alpharadin in the Treatment of Patients With Symptomatic Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer With Skeletal Metastases
• Study Start Date: June 2008
• Actual Primary Completion Date: July 2011
• Actual Study Completion Date: February 2014

Arms and Interventions

Arm	Intervention/treatment
Experimental: Radium-223 dichloride (Xofigo, BAY88-8223); Participants received radium-223 50 kilo Becquerel (kBq)/kg body weight (b.w.) for 6 intravenous (IV) administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals plus Best Standard of Care (BSoC).	Drug: Radium-223 dichloride (Xofigo, BAY88-8223); Radium-223 dichloride 50 kBq/kg b.w., 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals.; Other Name: Alpharadin; Drug: Best standard of care (BSoC); Best standard of care is regarded as the routine standard of care at each center, for example local EBRT (External Beam Radiation Therapy), corticosteroids, antiandrogens, estrogens (e.g., stilboestrol), estramustine or ketoconazole.
Placebo Comparator: Placebo; Participants received isotonic saline for 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals plus Best Standard of Care (BSoC).	Drug: Placebo; Isotonic saline 6 IV administrations separated by 4 weeks intervals.; Drug: Best standard of care (BSoC); Best standard of care is regarded as the routine standard of care at each center, for example local EBRT (External Beam Radiation Therapy), corticosteroids, antiandrogens, estrogens (e.g., stilboestrol), estramustine or ketoconazole.

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcome Measures :

1. Overall Survival [ Time Frame: From randomization to death due to any cause until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment, the data was collected up to the second data analysis date (15 JUL 2011) ]
   Overall survival was defined as the time from date of randomization to the date of death.

Secondary Outcome Measures :

1. Time to Total Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP) Progression [ Time Frame: From randomization to first ALP progression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
   The time from the first study drug administration to when ALP progression was observed, defined as: 1) In subjects with no ALP decline from baseline; a greater than or equal to 25% increase from baseline value and an increase in absolute value of greater than or equal to 2 ng/mL, at least 12 weeks from baseline; 2) In subjects with initial ALP decline from baseline; the time from start of treatment to first ALP increase that is greater than or equal to 25% increase and at least 2 ng/mL above the nadir value, which was confirmed by a second value obtained 3 or more weeks later
2. Percentage of Participants With Total ALP Response at Week 12 [ Time Frame: At Baseline and Week 12 ]
   ALP levels were measured in participants' blood at Week 12 and compared to baseline values. A confirmed total ALP response (either >/= 30% or 50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second total ALP value approximately 4 weeks later.
3. Percentage of Participants With Total ALP Response at End of Treatment (EOT; Week 24 or at the Time the Patient Dies or Discontinues Treatment Phase) [ Time Frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase) ]
   ALP levels were measured in participants' blood at EOT (Week 24) and compared to baseline values. A confirmed total ALP response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second total ALP value approximately 4 weeks later.
4. Percentage of Participants With Total ALP Normalization at Week 12 [ Time Frame: At Baseline and Week 12 ]
   The return of total ALP value to within normal range at 12 weeks in 2 consecutive measurements (at least 2 weeks apart) after start of treatment in subjects who had ALP above the upper limit of normal (ULN) at baseline.
5. Percentage Change From Baseline in Total ALP at Week 12 [ Time Frame: At Baseline and Week 12 ]
   ALP level was measured in subject's blood at Week 12 and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (ALP level at week 12 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100
6. Maximum Percentage Decrease From Baseline in Total ALP up to Week 12 [ Time Frame: From baseline to Week 12 ]
   ALP level was measured in participant's blood up to week 12 and the maximum percent decrease from the baseline up to Week 12 value was calculated as the minimum value of [(ALP level up to week 12 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
7. Percentage Change From Baseline in Total ALP at EOT (Week 24 or at the Time the Patient Dies or Discontinues Treatment Phase) [ Time Frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase) ]
   ALP level was measured in subject's blood at EOT (Week 24) and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (ALP level at EOT minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100
8. Maximum Percentage Decrease From Baseline in Total ALP During the 24 Week Treatment [ Time Frame: From baseline During the 24 Week Treatment ]
   ALP level was measured in participant's blood during the 24 week treatment (up to EOT) and the maximum percent decrease from baseline during the 24 week treatment value was calculated as the minimum value of [(ALP level up to week 24 minus ALP level at baseline)/(ALP level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
9. Time to Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) Progression [ Time Frame: From randomization to first PSA progression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
   The time from the first study drug administration to when PSA progression was observed, defined as: 1) In subjects with no PSA decline from baseline; a greater than or equal to 25% increase from baseline value and an increase in absolute value of greater than or equal to 2 ng/mL, at least 12 weeks from baseline; 2) In subjects with initial PSA decline from baseline; the time from start of treatment to first PSA increase that is greater than or equal to 25% increase and at least 2 ng/mL above the nadir value, which was confirmed by a second value obtained 3 or more weeks later
10. Percentage of Participants With PSA Response at Week 12 [ Time Frame: At Baseline and Week 12 ]
    PSA levels were measured in participants' blood at Week 12 and compared to baseline values. A confirmed PSA response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second PSA value approximately 4 weeks later.
11. Percentage of Participants With PSA Response at EOT (Week 24 or at the Time the Patient Dies or Discontinues Treatment Phase) [ Time Frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase) ]
    PSA levels were measured in participants' blood at EOT (Week 24) and compared to baseline values. A confirmed PSA response (>/=50% reduction from baseline) was confirmed by a second PSA value approximately 4 weeks later.
12. Percentage Change From Baseline in PSA at Week 12 [ Time Frame: At Baseline and Week 12 ]
    PSA level was measured in subject's blood at Week 12 and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (PSA level at week 12 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100
13. Maximum Percentage Decrease From Baseline in PSA up to Week 12 [ Time Frame: From baseline up to Week 12 ]
    PSA level was measured in participant's blood up to Week 12 and the maximum percent decrease from the baseline up to week 12 value was calculated as the minimum value of [(PSA level up to week 12 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
14. Percentage Change From Baseline in PSA at EOT (Week 24 or at the Time the Patient Dies or Discontinues Treatment Phase) [ Time Frame: At Baseline and End of Treatment (Week 24 or at the time the patient dies or discontinues treatment phase) ]
    PSA level was measured in subject's blood at EOT (Week 24) and the percent change from the baseline value was calculated (PSA level at EOT minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100
15. Maximum Percentage Decrease From Baseline in PSA Response During the 24 Week Treatment Period [ Time Frame: From baseline to End of Treatment (Week 24; 4 weeks post last injection) ]
    PSA level was measured in participant's blood during the 24 week treatment (up to EOT) and the maximum percent decrease from baseline during the 24 Week treatment value was calculated as the minimum value of [(PSA level up to week 24 minus PSA level at baseline)/(PSA level at baseline)*100] by participant, and set to zero if no decrease from baseline.
16. Time to First Skeletal Related Event (SRE) [ Time Frame: From randomization to first first SRE until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    A skeletal related event is the use of external beam radiotherapy to relieve skeletal symptoms or the occurrence of new symptomatic pathological bone fractures (vertebral or non-vertebral) or the occurrence of spinal cord compression or a tumour related orthopaedic surgical intervention. For all other events, the start date of the event/medication/therapy was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
17. Time to Occurrence of First Use of External Beam Radiation Therapy (EBRT) to Relieve Skeletal Symptoms [ Time Frame: From randomization to first EBRT until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of therapy was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
18. Time to Occurrence of First Use of Radioisotopes to Relieve Skeletal Symptoms [ Time Frame: From randomization to first use of radioisotopes until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of the radioisotopes was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
19. Time to Occurrence of First New Symptomatic Pathological Bone Fractures, Vertebral and Non-vertebral [ Time Frame: From randomization to occurrence of first new symptomatic pathological bone fractures until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of the event was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
20. Time to Occurrence of First Tumor Related Orthopedic Surgical Intervention [ Time Frame: From randomization to occurrence of first tumor related orthopedic surgical intervention until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of the intervention was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
21. Time to Occurrence of First Spinal Cord Compression [ Time Frame: From randomization to first spinal cord compression until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of the compression was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
22. Time to Occurrence of First Start of Any Other Anti-cancer Treatment [ Time Frame: From randomization to first start of any other anti-cancer treatment until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    The start date of the treatment was used as the time of the event. If an event has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the patient has been lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables will be censored at the last disease assessment date.
23. Time to Occurrence of First Deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) by at Least 2 Points From Baseline [ Time Frame: From randomization to first deterioration of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) until approximately 3 years after start of enrollment ]
    ECOG scores were: 0 = fully active; 1 = restricted in physically strenuous activity; 2 = ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to work; 3 = capable of only limited self-care; 4 = completely disabled; 5 = death. The visit at which a 2-point or more deterioration in PS was observed was the time of the event. ECOG was assessed at every visit. If a marked deterioration in PS has not occurred at the time of the analysis or the participant was lost to follow-up, the time-to-event variables were censored at the last assessment date.

Other Outcome Measures:

1. Number of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) at Week 0. [ Time Frame: Week 0 ]
   ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
2. Number of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) at Week 8. [ Time Frame: Week 8 ]
   ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
3. Number of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) at Week 16. [ Time Frame: Week 16 ]
   ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
4. Number of Participants With Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status (ECOG PS) at Week 24. [ Time Frame: Week 24 ]
   ECOG PS was defined as: 0 = Fully active, able to carry on all pre-disease performance without restriction; 1 = Restricted in physically strenuous activity but ambulatory and able to carry out work of a light or sedentary nature (eg, light house work, office work); 2 = Ambulatory and capable of all self-care but unable to carry out work activities. Up and about > 50% of waking hours; 3 = Capable of only limited self-care, confined to bed or chair > 50% of waking hours; 4 = Completely disabled. Cannot carry on any self-care. Totally confined to bed or chair; or 5 = Dead.
5. Absolute Scores for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - Prostate (FACT-P) Trial Outcome Index (TOI) [ Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
   The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score for the FACT-P TOI domain (physical and social well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated for each visit. Prostate Cancer Trial Outcome Index (TOI): Physical Well-being (PWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB) + Prostate Cancer (PCS). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 104 (best).
6. Changes From Baseline for FACT-P Trial Outcome Index (TOI) at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
   The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score for the FACT-P TOI domain (physical and social well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated for each visit. Possible scores were 0 to 104; the higher the score, the better the quality of life. The changes from baseline (range -104 to 104) in the domain FACT-P TOI were summarized using descriptive statistics at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2.
7. Absolute Scores for Physical Well Being, Social/Family Well Being, Emotional Well Being, Functional Well Being, and the Prostate Cancer Subscale at Week 16 [ Time Frame: At Week 16 ]
   The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Week 16.
8. Absolute Scores for Physical Well Being, Social/Family Well Being, Emotional Well Being, Functional Well Being, and the Prostate Cancer Subscale at Week 24 [ Time Frame: At Week 24 ]
   The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Week 24.
9. Absolute Scores for Physical Well Being, Social/Family Well Being, Emotional Well Being, Functional Well Being, and the Prostate Cancer Subscale at Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: At Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
   The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Possible scores for each subscale were 0 to 28; 0 to 28; 0 to 24; 0 to 28; and 0 to 48, respectively. All FACT-P items are scored on a scale of 0-4 representing the extent to which the item reflects the experience of the individual completing the instrument (0 - Not at all; 4 - Very much). Higher scores indicate better quality of life. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score was calculated at Follow-up Visit 2.
10. Absolute Scores for FACT-P Total Score at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: At Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
    The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. The absolute score of the FACT-P total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and prostate specific score) was calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2.FACT-P Total Score: Physical Well-being (PWB) + Social/Family Well-being (SWB) + Emotional Well-being (EWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB) + Prostate Cancer (PCS). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 156 (best).
11. Change From Baseline for FACT-P Total Score at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (week 42) ]
    The FACT-P was 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. It was supplemented by 12 questions relating to prostate cancer. Total possible score was 156; a higher score indicates a better quality of life. The changes from baseline in the FACT-P total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being and prostate specific score) were calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. Possible range was -156 to 156.
12. Absolute Scores for Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy - General (FACT-G) Total Score at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: At Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
    The FACT-G instrument consisted of 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. The FACT-G absolute total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being) was calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. FACT-G Total Score: Physical Well-being (PWB) + Social/Family Well-being (SWB) + Emotional Well-being (EWB) + Functional Well-being (FWB). Score ranges from 0 (worst) to 108 (best).
13. Change From Baseline for FACT-G Total Score at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) [ Time Frame: Baseline, Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2 (Week 42) ]
    The FACT-G instrument consisted of 27 questions relating to 4 domains: physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being. Total possible score was 108; a higher score indicates a better quality of life. The changes from baseline in the FACT-G total score (physical, social/family, emotional, and functional well-being) were calculated at Week 16, Week 24, and Follow-up Visit 2. Possible range was -108 to 108.
14. Number of Participants in the Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Components for Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression at Week 16 [ Time Frame: Week 16 ]
    The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at Week 16, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').
15. Number of Participants in the Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Components for Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression at Week 24 [ Time Frame: Week 24 ]
    The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at Week 24, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').
16. Number of Participants in the Euro Quality of Life (EQ-5D) Components for Mobility, Self-care, Usual Activities, Pain/Discomfort, and Anxiety/Depression at Follow-up Visit 8 (Week 139) [ Time Frame: Follow-up Visit 8 (Week 139) ]
    The EQ-5D questionnaire was given to the subject at each visit. The EQ-5D questionnaire consisted of 5 ordinal categorical responses (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, and anxiety/depression). Number of participants with EQ-5D at follow-up visit 8, as measured by this questionnaire, was counted. The scores for the EQ-5D dimensions are assigned according to the level of problems reported (1 'no problems'; 2 'some problems'; 3 'extreme problems').

Eligibility Criteria

• Ages Eligible for Study: 18 Years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
• Sexes Eligible for Study: Male
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Criteria

Inclusion Criteria:

• Histologically or cytologically confirmed adenocarcinoma of the prostate
• Known hormone refractory disease
• Multiple skeletal metastases (≥ 2 hot spots) on bone scintigraphy
• No intention to use cytotoxic chemotherapy within the next 6 months
• Either regular (not occasional) analgesic medication use for cancer related bone pain or treatment with EBRT (External Beam Radiation Therapy) for bone pain

Exclusion Criteria:

• Treatment with an investigational drug within previous 4 weeks, or planned during the treatment period
• Eligible for first course of docetaxel, i.e. patients who are fit enough, willing and where docetaxel is available
• Treatment with cytotoxic chemotherapy within previous 4 weeks, or planned during the treatment period, or failure to recover from adverse events due to cytotoxic chemotherapy administered more than 4 weeks ago
• Systemic radiotherapy with strontium-89, samarium-153, rhenium-186 or rhenium-188 for the treatment of bony metastases within previous 24 weeks
• Other malignancy treated within the last 5 years (except non-melanoma skin cancer or low-grade superficial bladder cancer)
• History of visceral metastasis, or visceral metastases as assessed by abdominal/pelvic CT or chest x-ray within previous 8 weeks

Contacts and Locations

Locations

United States, California

Los Angeles, California, United States, 90048-0750

Roseville, California, United States, 95661

United States, Florida

Tampa, Florida, United States, 33612

United States, Louisiana

New Orleans, Louisiana, United States, 70112

United States, Missouri

St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63110

United States, Nevada

Las Vegas, Nevada, United States, 89169

United States, Pennsylvania

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States, 19111-2497

Australia, New South Wales

Liverpool, New South Wales, Australia, 2170

Randwick, New South Wales, Australia, 2031

St Leonards, New South Wales, Australia, 2065

Sydney, New South Wales, Australia, 2010

Wahroonga, New South Wales, Australia, 2076

Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia, 2521

Australia, Queensland

Brisbane, Queensland, Australia, 4029

Toowoomba, Queensland, Australia, 4350

Australia, South Australia

Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 5000

Adelaide, South Australia, Australia, 5011

Australia, Tasmania

Hobart, Tasmania, Australia, 7000

Australia, Victoria

Fitzroy, Victoria, Australia, 3065

Australia, Western Australia

Nedlands, Western Australia, Australia, 6009

Belgium

Kortrijk, Belgium, 8500

Ottignies, Belgium, 1340

Brazil

Salvador, Bahia, Brazil, 41830-492

Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, 30110-090

Porto Alegre, Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil

Barretos, Sao Paulo, Brazil, 14784400

Piracicaba, Sao Paulo, Brazil

Belo Horizonte, Brazil, 30380490

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 20551 030

Sao Paulo, Brazil, 05403-900

Canada, Alberta

Edmonton, Alberta, Canada, T6G 1Z2

Canada, Ontario

London, Ontario, Canada, N6A 4G5

Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, K1H 8L6

Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M4N 3M5

Czech Republic

Brno, Czech Republic, 65653

Chomutov, Czech Republic, 430 12

Olomouc, Czech Republic, 775 20

Ostrava, Czech Republic, 708 52

Plzen - Bory, Czech Republic, 305 99

Praha 4, Czech Republic, 140 59

Usti nad Labem, Czech Republic, 401 13

France

La Roche Sur Yon, France, 85925

Montbeliard, France, 25209

Saint Cloud, France, 92210

Germany

Ulm, Baden-Württemberg, Germany, 89075

Frankfurt, Hessen, Germany, 60590

Marburg, Hessen, Germany, 35043

Göttingen, Niedersachsen, Germany, 37099

Hannover, Niedersachsen, Germany, 30625

Dortmund, Nordrhein-Westfalen, Germany, 44137

Mainz, Rheinland-Pfalz, Germany, 55131

Berlin, Germany, 10967

Berlin, Germany, 14197

Hamburg, Germany, 20246

Hong Kong

Chai Wan, Hong Kong

Hong Kong, Hong Kong

Hongkong, Hong Kong

Kowloon, Hong Kong

Israel

Beer Sheva, Israel, 8410101

Kfar Saba, Israel, 4428164

Tel Aviv, Israel, 6423906

Zrifin, Israel, 6093000

Italy

Meldola, Forlì, Italy, 47014

Candiolo, Torino, Italy, 10060

Bergamo, Italy, 24128

Milano, Italy, 20162

Reggio Emilia, Italy, 42123

Netherlands

Alkmaar, Netherlands, 1815 JD

Nijmegen, Netherlands, 6532 SZ

Rotterdam, Netherlands, 3015 CE

Norway

Bergen, Norway, 5021

Bodø, Norway, 8092

Kristiansand, Norway, N-4604

Oslo, Norway, 0450

Oslo, Norway, N-0310

Tromsø, Norway, 9038

Trondheim, Norway, 7006

Ålesund, Norway, 6026

Poland

Bydgoszcz, Poland, 85-165

Gliwice, Poland, 44-101

Kielce, Poland, 25-734

Krakow, Poland, 31-051

Luiblin, Poland, 20-954

Warszawa, Poland, 02-781

Wroclaw, Poland, 50 - 556

Wroclaw, Poland, 50-981

Singapore

Singapore, Singapore, 258499

Singapore, Singapore, 308433

Slovakia

Banska Bystrica, Slovakia, 97517

Bratislava, Slovakia, 82606

Bratislava, Slovakia, 83305

Martin, Slovakia, 03659

Presov, Slovakia, 08181

Trnava, Slovakia, 917 01

Spain

Santiago de Compostela, A Coruña, Spain, 15706

Alcorcón, Madrid, Spain, 28922

Barakaldo, Vizcaya, Spain, 48903

Barcelona, Spain, 08025

Barcelona, Spain, 08035

Barcelona, Spain, 08036

Córdoba, Spain, 14004

Pamplona, Spain, 31008

Valencia, Spain, 46026

Zaragoza, Spain, 50009

Sweden

Göteborg, Sweden, 413 45

Jönköping, Sweden, 551 85

Kalmar, Sweden, 391 85

Malmö, Sweden, 205 02

Sandviken, Sweden, 80187

Stockholm, Sweden, 171 76

Sundsvall, Sweden, 851 86

Umeå, Sweden, 901 85

United Kingdom

Romford, Essex, United Kingdom, RM7 0AG

Leicester, Leicestershire, United Kingdom, LE1 5WW

Bebington, Merseyside, United Kingdom, CH63 4JY

Nottingham, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom, NG5 1PB

Taunton, Somerset, United Kingdom, TA1 5DA

Ipswich, Suffolk, United Kingdom, IP4 5PD

Guildford, Surrey, United Kingdom, GU2 7XX

Sutton, Surrey, United Kingdom, SM2 5PT

Coventry, Warwickshire, United Kingdom, CV2 2DX

Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom, B15 2TH

Belfast, United Kingdom, BT9 7AB

Brighton, United Kingdom, BN2 5BD

Bristol, United Kingdom, BS2 8ED

Cardiff, United Kingdom

Derby, United Kingdom, DE22 3NE

Hull, United Kingdom, HU16 5JQ

Leeds, United Kingdom, LS9 7TF

Manchester, United Kingdom, M20 4BX

Northwood, United Kingdom, HA6 2RN

Plymouth, United Kingdom, PL6 8DH

Sheffield, United Kingdom, S10 2SJ

Southampton, United Kingdom, SO16 6YD

Wolverhampton, United Kingdom, WV10 0QP

Sponsors and Collaborators

Bayer

Investigators

• Study Chair: Christopher Parker, MD; The Royal Marsden Hospital, UK

More Information

Additional Information:

Click here to find information about studies related to Bayer Healthcare products conducted in Europe. 

Publications of Results:

Parker C, Nilsson S, Heinrich D, Helle SI, O'Sullivan JM, Fossa SD, Chodacki A, Wiechno P, Logue J, Seke M, Widmark A, Johannessen DC, Hoskin P, Bottomley D, James ND, Solberg A, Syndikus I, Kliment J, Wedel S, Boehmer S, Dall'Oglio M, Franzen L, Coleman R, Vogelzang NJ, O'Bryan-Tear CG, Staudacher K, Garcia-Vargas J, Shan M, Bruland OS, Sartor O; ALSYMPCA Investigators. Alpha emitter radium-223 and survival in metastatic prostate cancer. N Engl J Med. 2013 Jul 18;369(3):213-23. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1213755.

Hoskin P, Sartor O, O'Sullivan JM, Johannessen DC, Helle SI, Logue J, Bottomley D, Nilsson S, Vogelzang NJ, Fang F, Wahba M, Aksnes AK, Parker C. Efficacy and safety of radium-223 dichloride in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and symptomatic bone metastases, with or without previous docetaxel use: a prespecified subgroup analysis from the randomised, double-blind, phase 3 ALSYMPCA trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Nov;15(12):1397-406. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70474-7. Epub 2014 Oct 17.

Sartor O, Coleman R, Nilsson S, Heinrich D, Helle SI, O'Sullivan JM, Fossa SD, Chodacki A, Wiechno P, Logue J, Widmark A, Johannessen DC, Hoskin P, James ND, Solberg A, Syndikus I, Vogelzang NJ, O'Bryan-Tear CG, Shan M, Bruland OS, Parker C. Effect of radium-223 dichloride on symptomatic skeletal events in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer and bone metastases: results from a phase 3, double-blind, randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jun;15(7):738-46. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70183-4. Epub 2014 May 13.

Delacruz A, Arauz G, Curley T, Lindo A, Jensen T. Nursing management of patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer undergoing radium-223 dichloride treatment. Clin J Oncol Nurs. 2015 Apr;19(2):E31-5. doi: 10.1188/15.CJON.E31-E35.

Humm JL, Sartor O, Parker C, Bruland OS, Macklis R. Radium-223 in the treatment of osteoblastic metastases: a critical clinical review. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2015 Apr 1;91(5):898-906. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2014.12.061.

Nilsson S. Alpha-emitter radium-223 in the management of solid tumors: current status and future directions. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2014:e132-9. doi: 10.14694/EdBook_AM.2014.34.e132.

Den RB, Doyle LA, Knudsen KE. Practical guide to the use of radium 223 dichloride. Can J Urol. 2014 Apr;21(2 Supp 1):70-6.

Shirley M, McCormack PL. Radium-223 dichloride: a review of its use in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer with symptomatic bone metastases. Drugs. 2014 Apr;74(5):579-86. doi: 10.1007/s40265-014-0198-4.

Wissing MD, van Leeuwen FW, van der Pluijm G, Gelderblom H. Radium-223 chloride: Extending life in prostate cancer patients by treating bone metastases. Clin Cancer Res. 2013 Nov 1;19(21):5822-7. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-1896. Epub 2013 Sep 19.

Joung JY, Ha YS, Kim IY. Radium Ra 223 dichloride in castration-resistant prostate cancer. Drugs Today (Barc). 2013 Aug;49(8):483-90. doi: 10.1358/dot.2013.49.8.1968670.

Publications automatically indexed to this study by ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier (NCT Number):

Parker C, Zhan L, Cislo P, Reuning-Scherer J, Vogelzang NJ, Nilsson S, Sartor O, O'Sullivan JM, Coleman RE. Effect of radium-223 dichloride (Ra-223) on hospitalisation: An analysis from the phase 3 randomised Alpharadin in Symptomatic Prostate Cancer Patients (ALSYMPCA) trial. Eur J Cancer. 2017 Jan;71:1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.10.020. Epub 2016 Dec 6.

• Responsible Party: Bayer
• ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00699751
• Other Study ID Numbers: 15245; BC1-06 ( Other Identifier: Algeta ASA ); 2007-006195-11 ( EudraCT Number )
• First Posted: June 18, 2008
• Results First Posted: May 7, 2014
• Last Update Posted: May 27, 2016
• Last Verified: April 2016

Keywords provided by Bayer:

Hormone Refractory Prostate Cancer; Bone Metastases; Radium-223

Additional relevant MeSH terms:

Prostatic Neoplasms; Neoplasm Metastasis; Genital Neoplasms, Male; Urogenital Neoplasms; Neoplasms by Site; Neoplasms; Genital Diseases, Male; Genital Diseases; Urogenital Diseases; Prostatic Diseases; Male Urogenital Diseases; Neoplastic Processes; Pathologic Processes; Radium Ra 223 dichloride; Antineoplastic Agents