We are updating the design of this site. Learn more.
Show more
ClinicalTrials.gov
ClinicalTrials.gov Menu

A Randomized, Open-label Phase III Trial of Mapisal® Versus an Urea Hand-foot Cream as Prophylaxis for Capecitabine-induced Hand-foot Syndrome in Patients With Gastrointestinal Tumors or Breast Cancer (PROCAPP)

Expanded access is no longer available for this treatment.
Sponsor:
ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier:
NCT01626781
First Posted: June 25, 2012
Last Update Posted: October 22, 2013
The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Read our disclaimer for details.
Information provided by (Responsible Party):
AIO-Studien-gGmbH
June 21, 2012
June 25, 2012
October 22, 2013
 
A Randomized, Open-label Phase III Trial of Mapisal® Versus an Urea Hand-foot Cream as Prophylaxis for Capecitabine-induced Hand-foot Syndrome in Patients With Gastrointestinal Tumors or Breast Cancer

The purpose of this study is the examination of Mapisal® versus urea hand-foot cream as prophylaxis for capecitabine-induced hand-foot syndrome (HFS) in patients with gastrointestinal tumors or breast cancer, to assess the efficacy of Mapisal®.

Mapisal® is a medical device that is approved for the prophylaxis and treatment of HFS. Initial clinical data and case studies on the treatment and prophylaxis of Caelyx-induced HFS have been impressive. Because the pathomechanism of HFS caused by capecitabine is the same as for Caelyx-induced HFS, it is expected reason that administering Mapisal® should result in a significant reduction of HFS caused by capecitabine. The urea hand-foot cream was selected for the standard arm, because it is used commonly, is accepted by patients, and seems to have a positive influence on the severity of the HFS in the experience of many oncologists.

Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a frequently occurring, often dose limiting, dermatologic reaction associated with cytotoxic agents, such as capecitabine, liposomal doxorubicin, and doxetacel.

Adverse events affecting the integument have posed significant challenges to oncologists in recent years in terms of selecting appropriate supportive therapies. Not only medications that inhibit EGFR receptors such as erlotinib, gefitinib, panitumumab or cetuximab, but also multiple-receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors such as sunitinib and sorafenib and other "older" medications such as capecitabine can often lead to skin-related adverse events that can be difficult to manage.

These adverse events compromise skin-related quality of life and can lead to dose compromises or even the termination of treatment.

To date, there are no side effects reported for the use of either Mapisal® or urea hand-foot cream, making both treatments safe. Given the potential benefits of the treatments in preventing HFS by reducing discomfort and impairment of quality of life, the conduct of the trial is regarded as justifiable and there is no indication that patients are exposed to an increased risk associated with study participation.

Expanded Access
  • Device: Mapisal
    Mapisal® ointment will be applied to hand and feet three times daily, as well as after washing hands. Treatment should start 2 days prior to the first chemotherapy cycle with capecitabine and will continue daily for the first 6 weeks of chemotherapy.
  • Other: Urea hand-foot cream
    Urea hand-foot cream will be applied to hand and feet three times daily, as well as after washing hands. Treatment should start 2 days prior to the first chemotherapy cycle with capecitabine and will continue daily for the first 6 weeks of chemotherapy.
Hofheinz RD, Gencer D, Schulz H, Stahl M, Hegewisch-Becker S, Loeffler LM, Kronawitter U, Bolz G, Potenberg J, Tauchert F, Al-Batran SE, Schneeweiss A. Mapisal Versus Urea Cream as Prophylaxis for Capecitabine-Associated Hand-Foot Syndrome: A Randomized Phase III Trial of the AIO Quality of Life Working Group. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Aug 1;33(22):2444-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2014.60.4587. Epub 2015 Jun 29.
 
No longer available
Contact information is only displayed when the study is recruiting subjects
Germany
 
 
NCT01626781
AIO-Studien-gGmbH
AIO-Studien-gGmbH
Not Provided
Principal Investigator: Deniz Gencer, Dr. Universitätsmedizin Mannheim
AIO-Studien-gGmbH
October 2013