Study Stopped
Discontinuation of development of device.
Comparison of the Philips MicroDose Tomosynthesis System to 2D Digital Mammography
1 other identifier
interventional
347
1 country
1
Brief Summary
The primary objective of this study is to compare the safety and clinical performance of the Philips MicroDose Tomosynthesis system images and images from FFDM systems.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for not_applicable breast-cancer
Started Jan 2016
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 12, 2015
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
November 26, 2015
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
January 1, 2016
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
February 20, 2018
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 20, 2018
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
May 8, 2020
CompletedMay 8, 2020
April 1, 2020
2.1 years
November 12, 2015
April 23, 2020
April 23, 2020
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
To Compare the Clinical Performance of the Philips MicroDose Tomosynthesis System Images to Conventional 2D Mammography Images. Clinical Performance Will be Based on the Area Under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve.
Due to study termination the conventional images where not taken and it was not possible to calculate the Area under the Receiver Operating Characteristics Curve. Instead we are reporting the biopsy results from the Philips MicroDose Tomosynthesis system. The time frame from examination to biopsy is documented as an estimate based on the relative urgency to detect potential tumors.
Up to approximately 4 weeks.
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Compare Average Glandular Dose Between FDDM and Philips Tomosynthesis System
Nine months image accrual
Compare Non-cancer Recall Rates Between FDDM and Philips Tomosynthesis System.
Nine months image accrual
Compare Sensitivity Between FDDM and Philips Tomosynthesis System, Sensitivity Will be Estimated for Each Reader as the Proportion of Cancer Cases With Per-case BI-RADS Category 4 or Higher.
One year follow up will be performed on negative patients
Compare Specificity Between FDDM and Philips Tomosynthesis System. Specificity Will be Estimated by Reader as the Proportion of Non-cancer Cases With Per-case BI-RADS Category Less Than 4.
One year follow up will be performed on negative patients
Study Arms (1)
Imaging on experimental tomo device
OTHERWomen will have a bilateral two-view mammogram (a total of four images) with the Philips MicroDose Tomosynthesis system and a bilateral two-view mammogram (a total of four images) with an FFDM system. The order of this will be randomised. After collecting the cases together with ground truth a readers study will be performed.
Interventions
The system used for imaging in the experimental arm is the Philips MicroDose tomography system. The system used for imaging in the active comparator is a standard FFDM system
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Patient is female and at least 40 years of age
- No contraindication for routine bilateral mammography
- Screening Cohort
- Patient presents for a routine screening mammogram Biopsy Cohort
- Patient is scheduled for a biopsy
- Patient has a screening detected abnormality
You may not qualify if:
- Patient is pregnant or believes she may be pregnant; OR,
- Patient is breast feeding; OR
- Patient is unable or unwilling to give informed consent, including consent to reuse data for future research; OR,
- Patient has breast implants; OR
- Patient has previous surgical biopsy; OR
- Patient has previous breast cancer; OR
- Patient presented to screening with clinical symptoms (e.g. palpable lump, nipple discharge, nipple retraction, skin irritation or dimpling)
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
University of Alabama at Birmingham
Birmingham, Alabama, 35294-6830, United States
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Daniel Stenströmer
- Organization
- Philips AB
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Etta Pisano, PhD
Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restrictive Agreement
- No
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- NA
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- SCREENING
- Intervention Model
- SINGLE GROUP
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 12, 2015
First Posted
November 26, 2015
Study Start
January 1, 2016
Primary Completion
February 20, 2018
Study Completion
February 20, 2018
Last Updated
May 8, 2020
Results First Posted
May 8, 2020
Record last verified: 2020-04
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will not share
No individual participant data will be shared with researchers outside the company or otherwise engaged in the study.