Neuroendocrine Tumours Clinical Trial
Official title:
Accuracy and Clinical Impact of 68-Ga-labeled Octreotide Analogues PET in Diagnosis and Staging of Duodenal-pancreatic Neuroendocrine Tumours; Proposal of a Multicenter, Prospective Clinical Trial
Verified date | March 2018 |
Source | Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova-IRCCS |
Contact | n/a |
Is FDA regulated | No |
Health authority | |
Study type | Interventional |
The diagnostic work-up of patients suspected of having neuroendocrine tumours (NETs) has
traditionally been a challenging issue. The last two decades have been marked by the
application to use in the diagnosis of NETs of 3 newly available diagnostic techniques:
endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS), multidetector CT (MDCT), and more recently, positron
emission tomography using 68Ga-labelled octreotide analogues (PET). In a prospective study
conducted at a single referral centre that compared PET with conventional somatostatin
receptor scintigraphy and MDCT in diagnosis, staging and follow-up of patients affected by
NET, PET detected more primary and secondary lesions than other methods. Recent studies
investigated the clinical impact of PET in the management of patients affected by NET,
previously studied by MDCT. The investigators recently reported the results of the
investigation of 19 patients suspected of having primary pancreatic NET and studied by PET,
MDCT and EUS. The investigators preliminary data suggest that PET may be slightly more
sensitive than MDCT in detecting small (<2cm) pancreatic lesions; accuracy of PET and EUS is
probably similar. No prospective study has yet been devoted to evaluate the accuracy of PET
in the diagnosis and staging of primary duodenal-pancreatic NETs. Furthermore, the clinical
impact of the adjunct of PET to the traditional protocols of diagnosis and staging of these
tumours waits to be thoroughly evaluated. Thus the appropriate place of PET in the diagnostic
algorithm of patients suspected of having duodenal-pancreatic NET remains undefined.
The main aim of this project is to prospectively compare the accuracy of PET and MDCT in the
diagnosis and staging of patients suspected of having duodenal-pancreatic NETs. The
investigators hypothesised that PET is superior to MDCT in the diagnosis of these neoplasm
(the dimension of the study sample is estimated in order to detect a 10% difference). The
impact of PET on management plan of affected patients will also be evaluated. As a secondary
endpoint of the study, the investigators will compare EUS, PET and MDCT in the diagnosis of
primary duodenal-pancreatic NET. The study is designed as a multicentre, prospective,
non-randomised clinical trial. All patients will undergo MDCT, PET and EUS in this fixed
order.
Status | Completed |
Enrollment | 142 |
Est. completion date | July 5, 2016 |
Est. primary completion date | August 2015 |
Accepts healthy volunteers | No |
Gender | All |
Age group | 18 Years to 90 Years |
Eligibility |
Inclusion Criteria: 1. Patients affected by proved MEN-I, in whom a neoplasm in the duodenal-pancreatic area is suspected. 2. Patients with clinical diagnosis of carcinoid syndrome. 3. Patients with clinical diagnosis of Zollinger-Ellison syndrome. 4. Patients with insulinoma, as proved by fasting test. 5. Patient with clinical pictures and laboratory findings suggesting other functional or non-functional NET. 6. Patients who had previously undergone surgery, including total and subtotal pancreatectomy, or a duodenotomy, intended as curative for a histologically confirmed NET. 7. Patients who were diagnosed with NET metastasis with unknown primary location of the disease. 8. Patients undergoing diagnostic work-up for a periduodenal or pancreatic lesion incidentally found during abdominal ultrasound (not performed for suspicion of a NET) and with ultrasonographic characteristics (rounded, hypoechoic or egg-eye, well demarcated) suspicious for NET. 9. Patients undergoing diagnostic work-up for a periduodenal or pancreatic lesion incidentally found during TC (not performed for suspicion of a NET) and with radiological characteristics (well demarcated, hypervascular) suspicious for NET. Exclusion criteria: 1. Patient unwilling, or unable to consent. 2. Pregnancy, or lactation. 3. Age <18 years 4. Known diagnosis of duodenal-pancreatic NET. 5. Patients with concomitant life-threatening disease. 6. Patients who had already undergone PET or EUS, in the last six months. In particular patients should be excluded from the study, when a lesion in the duodenal-pancreatic area, with characteristic suspicious for a NET, is incidentally diagnosed by PET, or EUS, or when a previously unsuspected diagnosis of NET is suggested by EUS-FNA of a pancreatic lesion. 7. Patients who had previously undergone total gastrectomy or pancreatectomy will be included in the study, but they will not undergo EUS. |
Country | Name | City | State |
---|---|---|---|
Austria | Irene Virgolini | Innsbruck | |
Italy | Enrico Papini | Albano Laziale | Roma |
Italy | Nadia Cremonini | Bologna | |
Italy | Fernando Cirillo | Cremona | |
Italy | Diego Ferone | Genova | |
Italy | Laura Scaltriti | Guastalla | Reggio Emilia |
Italy | Giovanna Pepe | Milano | |
Italy | Luppi Gabriele | Modena | |
Italy | Rita Conigliaro | Modena | |
Italy | Pellegrino Crafa | Parma | |
Italy | Piero Ferolla | Perugia | |
Italy | Antonio Chella | Pisa | |
Italy | ASMN IRCCS Reggio Emilia | Reggio Emilia | RE |
Italy | Roberto Baldelli | Roma | |
Italy | Vittoria Rufini | Roma | |
Italy | Claudio De Angelis | Torino | |
Italy | Marco Gallo | Torino | |
Italy | Paolo Limone | Torino | |
Italy | Franco Grimaldi | Udine | |
Italy | Massimo Falconi | Verona | |
Italy | Roberto Castello | Verona |
Lead Sponsor | Collaborator |
---|---|
Arcispedale Santa Maria Nuova-IRCCS |
Austria, Italy,
Ambrosini V, Campana D, Bodei L, Nanni C, Castellucci P, Allegri V, Montini GC, Tomassetti P, Paganelli G, Fanti S. 68Ga-DOTANOC PET/CT clinical impact in patients with neuroendocrine tumors. J Nucl Med. 2010 May;51(5):669-73. doi: 10.2967/jnumed.109.071712. Epub 2010 Apr 15. — View Citation
Gabriel M, Decristoforo C, Kendler D, Dobrozemsky G, Heute D, Uprimny C, Kovacs P, Von Guggenberg E, Bale R, Virgolini IJ. 68Ga-DOTA-Tyr3-octreotide PET in neuroendocrine tumors: comparison with somatostatin receptor scintigraphy and CT. J Nucl Med. 2007 Apr;48(4):508-18. — View Citation
Versari A, Camellini L, Carlinfante G, Frasoldati A, Nicoli F, Grassi E, Gallo C, Giunta FP, Fraternali A, Salvo D, Asti M, Azzolini F, Iori V, Sassatelli R. Ga-68 DOTATOC PET, endoscopic ultrasonography, and multidetector CT in the diagnosis of duodenopancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a single-centre retrospective study. Clin Nucl Med. 2010 May;35(5):321-8. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0b013e3181d6677c. — View Citation
Type | Measure | Description | Time frame | Safety issue |
---|---|---|---|---|
Other | Accuracy of EUS-FNA | Accuracy was computed as: (number of true positives + true negatives)/(number + true positives + true negatives + false positives + false negatives). Reference standard will be considered the diagnoses of primary NET, when supported by histology or by at least one year of follow up. | one year | |
Primary | Accuracy of the diagnostic test. | Accuracy was computed as: (number of true positives + true negatives)/(number + true positives + true negatives + false positives + false negatives). Accuracy of MDCT and PET in the diagnosis of primary duodenal-pancreatic NET will be calculated on a patient basis and they will be compared using McNemar test. Reference standard will be considered the diagnoses of primary NET, when supported by unambiguous cytology, histology or by at least one year of follow up.In cases of disagreement between cytological and histological findings, histology will be the gold standard. | one year | |
Primary | Accuracy of the diagnostic test (after exclusion of patients enrolled due to a incidentally diagnosed lesion) | Accuracy was calculated as above, but based on subjects matching criteria 1-7 of the list of clinical situations suggestive for NET (see below, inclusion criteria). Patients with a lesion suspicion of NET incidentally diagnosed during abdominal ultrasound or MDCT not performed for clinical suspicion of NET were excluded. | one year | |
Secondary | Number of Participants with Adverse Events as a Measure of Safety. | Number of patients with adverse events of each procedure: PET, MDCT, endoscopic ultrasonography-fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) | one year | |
Secondary | Sensitivity of the diagnostic tests. | Sensitivity (Number of true positive results/number of true positive + false negative results) of the diagnostic tests in the diagnosis of primary duodenal-pancreatic NET. Sensitivity of each diagnostic test (MDCT, PET, EUS) will be calculated separately on patient (number of true affected patients/number of true affected + number of false non affected patients) and on lesion basis (number of true positive lesions/number of true positive + false positive lesions)with its 95% confidence interval based on normal approximation.Reference standard will be considered the diagnoses of primary NET, when supported by unambiguous cytology, histology or by at least one year of follow up.In cases of disagreement between cytological and histological findings, histology will be the gold standard. | one year | |
Secondary | Specificity of the diagnostic tests. | Specificity (Number of true negative results/number of true negative + false positive results) of the diagnostic tests in the diagnosis of primary duodenal-pancreatic NET. Specificity of each diagnostic test (MDCT, PET, EUS) will be calculated separately on patient (number of true non affected patients/number of true non affected + number of false affected patients) and on lesion basis (number of true negative lesions/number of true negative positive + false positive lesions)with its 95% confidence interval based on normal approximation.Reference standard will be considered the diagnoses of primary NET, when supported by unambiguous cytology, histology or by at least one year of follow up.In cases of disagreement between cytological and histological findings, histology will be the gold standard. | one year | |
Secondary | Clinical impact of PET. | Changes in management plan in consequence of PET results. Prior to receiving the results of the PET scans, the referring clinician will be required to explicit a management plan for the patient. Following the release of the PET results, a second management plan will be recorded, including any changes resulting from the PET findings. The number of patients with changes in their management plan will be recorded. | one year | |
Secondary | Diameter of lesions. | Median diameter (cm) and ranges of lesions diagnosed by each technique will be calculated. | one year |
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Terminated |
NCT00323076 -
[18]F-FAZA PET Imaging Study in Patients With Cancer of the Head & Neck, Lung, Renal Cell, Brain, Lymphoma and Neuroendocrine Tumours
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT02075606 -
Circulating Tumour Cells in Somatuline Autogel Treated NeuroEndocrine Tumours Patients
|
Phase 4 | |
Completed |
NCT00326469 -
Efficacy and Safety of Lanreotide Autogel in Tumour Stabilization of Patients With Progressive Neuroendocrine Tumours
|
Phase 2 | |
Terminated |
NCT02788578 -
A Retrospective Data Analysis of Therapy With PRRT Combined With Lanreotide Autogel® for Neuroendocrine Tumours
|
||
Completed |
NCT01840449 -
Somatuline Predictive Factors in Acromegaly and NET
|
||
Completed |
NCT02698410 -
Efficacy and Safety of Lanreotide Autogel (ATG) in Combination With Temozolomide in Subjects With Thoracic Neuroendocrine Tumors.
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT02923934 -
A Phase II Trial of Ipilimumab and Nivolumab for the Treatment of Rare Cancers
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT04579679 -
Open-Label Surufatinib in European Patients With NET
|
Phase 2 |