NCT03354611

Brief Summary

Up to one hundred (100) female patients will be enrolled and consented to participate in the study. These women will be enrolled from screening assigned BIRADS 0, patient complaint, or referral for second opinion. The enrolled patient will accept CE-CBBCT scans within 4 weeks of her diagnostic mammography and before breast biopsy if biopsy is needed. The final diagnostic workup outcome of these enrolled patients needs to include at least 30 confirmed cancers cases.

Trial Health

57
Monitor

Trial Health Score

Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach

Enrollment
21

participants targeted

Target at below P25 for phase_2 breast-cancer

Timeline
Completed

Started Sep 2018

Geographic Reach
1 country

2 active sites

Status
terminated

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 21, 2017

Completed
7 days until next milestone

First Posted

Study publicly available on registry

November 28, 2017

Completed
10 months until next milestone

Study Start

First participant enrolled

September 10, 2018

Completed
3 years until next milestone

Primary Completion

Last participant's last visit for primary outcome

September 1, 2021

Completed
Same day until next milestone

Study Completion

Last participant's last visit for all outcomes

September 1, 2021

Completed
Last Updated

March 16, 2023

Status Verified

February 1, 2021

Enrollment Period

3 years

First QC Date

November 21, 2017

Last Update Submit

March 14, 2023

Conditions

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (1)

  • Breast lesions

    The existence of lesions in the breast

    Within 4 weeks after the imaging acquisition if finished if there is a suspicious finding in the images.

Study Arms (1)

Diagnostic Workup

EXPERIMENTAL

The subjects will first have a pre-contrast CBBCT scan. Iodinated contrast will be injected intravenously, and then another CBBCT scans will be performed to capture the tumor vasculature enhancement.

Radiation: Contrast Enhanced Cone Beam Breast CT ScanDrug: Contrast Dye, Iodinated

Interventions

* Pre-contrast scan * Begin contrast injection (and saline chaser) * Post-contrast Scan. Start time of post-contrast CE-CBBCT scan is 90-200 seconds after start of injection, depending on method of contrast delivery (bolus vs hand injection)

Diagnostic Workup

1.5-2ml/kg body weight (100 ml maximum) of a low osmolar, nonionic, 300-350 mgI/ml iodinated contrast agent, will be injected at a rate of \~2.0 ml/s, for a total injection time of 30-60 seconds (for a 50 kg subject). This will be immediately followed by a saline "chaser" from 20 to 40 ml at \~2 ml/s (20 seconds) to maximize dynamic enhancement.

Diagnostic Workup

Eligibility Criteria

Age35 Years+
Sexfemale
Healthy VolunteersNo
Age GroupsAdult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

  • Female sex
  • Age 35 years or older
  • Any ethnicity
  • Have an abnormality detected by Breast Self Exam (BSE), or Clinical Breast Exam (CBE), or have an abnormality detected by an imaging modality.
  • Will undergo study imaging within four weeks from the date of diagnostic mammography, prior to breast biopsy (if needed).
  • Able to provide informed consent
  • Post-menopausal, surgically sterile, or effective birth control. For women of childbearing potential, negative pregnancy test or has signed pregnancy test waiver
  • If required by standard of care, eGFR \>45 within 48 hours to 6 weeks of CE-CBBCT exam

You may not qualify if:

  • Pregnancy
  • Lactation
  • Unknown pregnancy status AND
  • has refused pregnancy testing and
  • has refused to sign a pregnancy test waiver
  • Women who are unable or unwilling to understand or to provide informed consent
  • Women with physical limitations that may prohibit resting prone on the exam table, such as, but not limited to: frozen shoulder, recent heart surgery, pace maker.
  • Women who are unable to tolerate study constraints.
  • Women who have received radiation treatments to the thorax or breast area for malignant and nonmalignant conditions, such as (but not limited to):
  • Treatment for enlarged thymus gland as an infant
  • Irradiation for benign breast conditions, including breast inflammation after giving birth
  • Treatment for Hodgkin's disease
  • Women who have participated in a prior breast clinical trial that gave additional radiation dose, such as an additional mammogram.
  • Women who have received large numbers of diagnostic x-ray examinations for monitoring of disease such as (but not limited to):
  • Tuberculosis
  • +17 more criteria

Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.

Sponsors & Collaborators

Study Sites (2)

UR Medicine Breast Imaging

Rochester, New York, 14623, United States

Location

Knoxville Comprehensive Breast Center

Knoxville, Tennessee, 37909, United States

Location

Related Publications (12)

  • O'Connell A, Conover DL, Zhang Y, Seifert P, Logan-Young W, Lin CF, Sahler L, Ning R. Cone-beam CT for breast imaging: Radiation dose, breast coverage, and image quality. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Aug;195(2):496-509. doi: 10.2214/AJR.08.1017.

    PMID: 20651210BACKGROUND
  • Pediconi F, Venditti F, Padula S, Roselli A, Moriconi E, Giacomelli L, Catalano C, Passariello R. CE-Magnetic Resonance Mammography for the evaluation of the contralateral breast in patients with diagnosed breast cancer. Radiol Med. 2005 Jul-Aug;110(1-2):61-8. English, Italian.

    PMID: 16163140BACKGROUND
  • Esserman L, Hylton N, Yassa L, Barclay J, Frankel S, Sickles E. Utility of magnetic resonance imaging in the management of breast cancer: evidence for improved preoperative staging. J Clin Oncol. 1999 Jan;17(1):110-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1999.17.1.110.

    PMID: 10458224BACKGROUND
  • Orel SG, Schnall MD. MR imaging of the breast for the detection, diagnosis, and staging of breast cancer. Radiology. 2001 Jul;220(1):13-30. doi: 10.1148/radiology.220.1.r01jl3113.

    PMID: 11425968BACKGROUND
  • Gulsun M, Demirkazik FB, Ariyurek M. Evaluation of breast microcalcifications according to Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System criteria and Le Gal's classification. Eur J Radiol. 2003 Sep;47(3):227-31. doi: 10.1016/s0720-048x(02)00181-x.

    PMID: 12927667BACKGROUND
  • McDonald RJ, McDonald JS, Kallmes DF, Jentoft ME, Murray DL, Thielen KR, Williamson EE, Eckel LJ. Intracranial Gadolinium Deposition after Contrast-enhanced MR Imaging. Radiology. 2015 Jun;275(3):772-82. doi: 10.1148/radiol.15150025. Epub 2015 Mar 5.

    PMID: 25742194BACKGROUND
  • Prionas ND, Lindfors KK, Ray S, Huang SY, Beckett LA, Monsky WL, Boone JM. Contrast-enhanced dedicated breast CT: initial clinical experience. Radiology. 2010 Sep;256(3):714-23. doi: 10.1148/radiol.10092311.

    PMID: 20720067BACKGROUND
  • Seifert P, Conover D, Zhang Y, Morgan R, Arieno A, Destounis S, Somerville P, Murphy PF. Evaluation of malignant breast lesions in the diagnostic setting with cone beam breast computed tomography (Breast CT): feasibility study. Breast J. 2014 Jul-Aug;20(4):364-74. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12285. Epub 2014 Jun 17.

    PMID: 24934253BACKGROUND
  • O'Connell AM, Kawakyu-O'Connor D. Dedicated Cone-beam Breast Computed Tomography and Diagnostic Mammography: Comparison of Radiation Dose, Patient Comfort, And Qualitative Review of Imaging Findings in BI-RADS 4 and 5 Lesions. J Clin Imaging Sci. 2012;2:7. doi: 10.4103/2156-7514.93274. Epub 2012 Feb 25.

    PMID: 22439131BACKGROUND
  • O'Connell AM, Karellas A, Vedantham S. The potential role of dedicated 3D breast CT as a diagnostic tool: review and early clinical examples. Breast J. 2014 Nov-Dec;20(6):592-605. doi: 10.1111/tbj.12327. Epub 2014 Sep 8.

    PMID: 25199995BACKGROUND
  • Fukumura D, Duda DG, Munn LL, Jain RK. Tumor microvasculature and microenvironment: novel insights through intravital imaging in pre-clinical models. Microcirculation. 2010 Apr;17(3):206-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1549-8719.2010.00029.x.

    PMID: 20374484BACKGROUND
  • Boetes C, Mus RD, Holland R, Barentsz JO, Strijk SP, Wobbes T, Hendriks JH, Ruys SH. Breast tumors: comparative accuracy of MR imaging relative to mammography and US for demonstrating extent. Radiology. 1995 Dec;197(3):743-7. doi: 10.1148/radiology.197.3.7480749.

    PMID: 7480749BACKGROUND

MeSH Terms

Conditions

Breast Neoplasms

Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)

Neoplasms by SiteNeoplasmsBreast DiseasesSkin DiseasesSkin and Connective Tissue Diseases

Study Design

Study Type
interventional
Phase
phase 2
Allocation
NA
Masking
NONE
Purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Intervention Model
SINGLE GROUP
Model Details: Subjects in this group will be enrolled from screening assigned BIRADS 0, patient complaint, or referral for second opinion. The enrolled patient will accept CE-CBBCT scans within 4 weeks of her diagnostic mammography and before breast biopsy if biopsy is needed.
Sponsor Type
INDUSTRY
Responsible Party
SPONSOR

Study Record Dates

First Submitted

November 21, 2017

First Posted

November 28, 2017

Study Start

September 10, 2018

Primary Completion

September 1, 2021

Study Completion

September 1, 2021

Last Updated

March 16, 2023

Record last verified: 2021-02

Data Sharing

IPD Sharing
Will not share

Locations