ctDNA and Cartilaginous tumours
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Does circulating DNA predict the grade and disease burden of chondrosarcoma? A nationwide collaboration Study
IRAS ID
228173
Contact name
Adrienne Flanagan
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
Royal National Orthopaedic Hospital
Duration of Study in the UK
3 years, 0 months, 0 days
Research summary
Conventional and dedifferentiated Chondrosarcoma is the second most common primary bone tumour. Currently the most accurate clinical management decisions for patients with cartilage tumours are based on a combination of the grade of the tumour which is given by the histopathologist by looking down the microscope, and clinical evaluation – mainly imaging, and pain. However there is a lack of consistency between pathologists concerning the clinical outcome associated with the grading of cartilaginous tumors which impacts on clinical management of patients with chondrosarcoma. Based on various pilot research invesigations, we hypothise that the detection of a mutant (IDH1) in the blood is a more sensitive prognostic indicator for chondrosarcoma than histology.\n\nIn this study we will recruit 100 patients newly diagnosed with central chondrosarcoma, and 30 patients with benign cartilaginous tumours (enchondroma) from 5 primary bone tumour hospitals.Patients will be requested to give a small sample of blood before surgery and at their follow-up hospital appoinments up to a minimum of 12 months and maximum of 36 months. \n\nThe tumour biopsy and resection sample will also be sent to the sponsor site where analysis of the tumour DNA will be studied to assess if the tumour has the IDH1 mutation. If an IDH1 mutation is detected in the tumour, the blood samples taken before and longitudinally after treatment will be tested for evidence of the mutant IDH1 in the ctDNA(circulating free DNA). By monitoring the ctDNA level in the blood pre and post-surgery and correlating with the clinical outcome (symptoms, imaging for metastasis and local recurrence) we will be able to address the objectives outlined in section A10.
REC name
London - Bloomsbury Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
17/LO/1423
Date of REC Opinion
11 Sep 2017
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion