Can repeated MRI scans reveal how tumors respond to radiation?
NCT ID NCT04188535
First seen Sep 02, 2026 · Last updated Sep 03, 2026 · Updated 1 time
Summary
This study tests whether taking multiple MRI scans before, during, and after standard radiation therapy can help doctors see how tumors change. Researchers will enroll people with advanced esophageal cancer, glioblastoma, prostate cancer, vulvar cancer, or pediatric glioma. The goal is to see if this imaging approach is practical and useful for assessing treatment response.
What this could mean
Our plain-language read of the trial. This is informational only, not medical advice or a prediction.
- Active substance
- Serial magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans before, during, and after radiation therapy
- What this could lead to
- If repeated MRI scans prove feasible and useful, doctors could better track how tumors respond to radiation and potentially adjust treatment plans in real time.
- What could go wrong
- This is an early feasibility study, so it may not show clear benefits. MRI scans may not reliably capture tumor changes, and the approach could fail to improve outcomes.
This is an AI summary of the original study and may miss details. Read our disclaimer.
Study facts
What this study's own registry entry says, in plain language.
- Phase
-
Not a phased trial
Phase numbers describe drug development. The registry uses this when they do not apply, as it does for trials of devices, procedures or behaviour changes, and for observational studies.
- Participants
-
About 149 people
The number the study aims to enrol. It can still change while the study runs.
- Started
-
Jan 2020
- Expected to finish
-
Jul 2030
An estimate. End dates often move.
- Lead sponsor
-
Other sponsor
The registry's catch-all category, for sponsors it does not file as a company, a government agency, or a research network.
Who can take part
This study's own entry requirements. Only the study team can say for certain whether you qualify.
- Ages
-
18 years and older
- Sex
-
Anyone
- Healthy volunteers
-
Not accepted
This study is not open to healthy volunteers. The entry requirements below say who it is open to.
Show the full entry requirements Hide the full entry requirements
Copied word for word from the study's registry entry, so the wording is the study team's rather than ours.
Inclusion Criteria: * Participants must have a confirmed malignancy requiring radiation therapy. * Age: 18 years or older except where otherwise specified in subprotocol. * ECOG performance status ≤2 (Karnofsky ≥60%) * Ability to understand and the willingness to sign a written informed consent document. * Any further criteria listed in the specific disease site subprotocol. * (Esophageal cohort) Patients must be considered appropriate candidates for neoadjuvant chemoradiation therapy followed by esophagectomy. Patients must have an endoscopic ultrasound done or scheduled to be done at the baseline visit. * (Glioblastoma cohort) Patients with a histologically confirmed newly diagnosed intracranial glioblastoma or gliosarcoma who will be undergoing radiation therapy as part of clinical care. * (Prostate cohort) Patients with localized prostate cancer who are planning to receive androgen deprivation therapy and definitive radiation therapy. * (Vulvar cohort) Patients with biopsy-proven locally advanced vulvar cancer for which definitive radiotherapy is planned. * (Pediatric glioma cohort) Patients age 18 or under (patients 18-30 years old are also eligible if the physician determines that based on genetics, the tumor biology is consistent with pediatric high grade glioma). Patients with a histologically confirmed newly diagnosed high-grade glioma (WHO grade III or IV) who will be undergoing radiation therapy as part of clinical care. Patients with DIPG are only eligible if biopsy-confirmed high grade DIPG is present. Ability to understand and/or willingness of their parent or legally authorized representative to sign a written informed consent document. * (Sarcoma cohort) Patients with a histologically confirmed newly diagnosed high-grade glioma (WHO grade III or IV) who will be undergoing radiation therapy as part of clinical care. Exclusion Criteria: * Disease-specific exclusion criteria will be specified in a subprotocol. * For MRI involving contrast, history of allergic reactions attributed to gadolinium-based IV contrast. If patient will not receive contrast, this is not applicable and kidney function will not affect eligibility. * Inability to undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI).
Get updates
Get notified about this study
Sign up to get updates when this study changes or when new studies for Esophageal cancer are added.
By submitting, you agree to our Terms of use
Conditions
The condition(s) this trial relates to.
As listed by the trial registrant
The condition terms exactly as the trial's registrant entered them.
How to take part
Only the study team decides who joins. These are the ways to reach them.
-
The places running it
2 sites. The list below names each one and where it is.
-
The official record
ClinicalTrials.gov lists the study team's own contact details, including names and phone numbers. We don't republish those.
-
A doctor treating you
A doctor who knows your case can contact a study site on your behalf, and can tell you whether this study is worth pursuing at all.
Contacts and locations
Locations
-
Brigham and Women Hospital
RECRUITINGBoston, Massachusetts, 02115, United States
-
Dana Farber Cancer Institute
RECRUITINGBoston, Massachusetts, 02215, United States
More trials for these conditions
Other studies related to the condition(s) this trial covers.
- RE-irradiation for isolated FOCal recurrence of prostate cancer with ultrahypofracted SBRT: the RE-FOCUS study - pushing the boundaries of precision and efficacy
- A sharper eye for cancer: new PET tracer targets hidden tumors
- Can a new drug shrink tumors that resist standard care?
- Could the anesthesia used during surgery influence whether esophageal cancer returns?
- Can a radioactive tracer help surgeons find hidden prostate cancer?
- Steam therapy vs. surgery: can a less invasive fix help men with blocked urine flow?