Trial Outcomes & Findings for PET Enhanced CT Scan Performance in Cancer (NCT NCT01881620)
NCT ID: NCT01881620
Last Updated: 2024-11-18
Results Overview
The primary endpoint was the inter-observer reproducibility of the interpretation of the combined PET / enhanced CT scan (PET-CT) by anatomical region. Reproducibility was assessed for each of the 5 anatomical regions (thorax, abdomen, pelvis, bone, nervous system). Two independant pairs (B1 and B2), each composed of one nuclear physician and one radiologist interpreted the PET-CT examination and described each of the 5 anatomical régions according to 3 modalities (Presence of suspicious lesion(s); Presence of dubious lesion(s); Absence of suspicious and dubious lesion). The inter-observer reproducibility (inter-pairs of observers) was evaluated for each anatomical region by comparing the interpretations of the two pairs, using the weighted kappa concordance coefficient \[ref = Fleiss J, Levin B, Cho Paik M. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Third ed. 2003.\].Interpretation by B1 after PET-CT examination (1 month after). Interpretation by B2 at the end of the study
COMPLETED
NA
109 participants
1 year
2024-11-18
Participant Flow
Participant milestones
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan : diagnostic imaging exam First, realisation of CT scan without injection followed by a PET scan (TEPSCAN) on the same Phillips GEMINI TF PET/CT camera.
A few minutes after the TEPSCAN, injection CT is performed (XenetiX, iodinated contrast agent 350 mg l/mL).
The COMBI TEP exam includes the TEP and the 2 series of scans (not injected low dose and injected full dose).
|
|---|---|
|
Overall Study
STARTED
|
109
|
|
Overall Study
COMPLETED
|
105
|
|
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
|
4
|
Reasons for withdrawal
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan : diagnostic imaging exam First, realisation of CT scan without injection followed by a PET scan (TEPSCAN) on the same Phillips GEMINI TF PET/CT camera.
A few minutes after the TEPSCAN, injection CT is performed (XenetiX, iodinated contrast agent 350 mg l/mL).
The COMBI TEP exam includes the TEP and the 2 series of scans (not injected low dose and injected full dose).
|
|---|---|
|
Overall Study
Protocol Violation
|
4
|
Baseline Characteristics
Missing data for 7 data
Baseline characteristics by cohort
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=109 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Age, Continuous
|
63.6 years
STANDARD_DEVIATION 14.2 • n=109 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Female
|
46 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Sex: Female, Male
Male
|
63 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Region of Enrollment
France
|
109 participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Weight
|
69.1 kilogram
STANDARD_DEVIATION 15 • n=102 Participants • Missing data for 7 data
|
|
height
|
168.4 centimetre
STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.7 • n=72 Participants • Missing data for 37 patients
|
|
Tumor localisation
Not available
|
1 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
Digestive
|
66 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
Lung
|
17 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
Ear Nose and Throat
|
2 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
Lymphoma
|
21 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
Thyroid
|
1 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
|
Tumor localisation
ovarian
|
1 Participants
n=109 Participants
|
PRIMARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearPopulation: Eligible patients with PET-CT scanner performed AND interpretation of 2 pairs of observors available.
The primary endpoint was the inter-observer reproducibility of the interpretation of the combined PET / enhanced CT scan (PET-CT) by anatomical region. Reproducibility was assessed for each of the 5 anatomical regions (thorax, abdomen, pelvis, bone, nervous system). Two independant pairs (B1 and B2), each composed of one nuclear physician and one radiologist interpreted the PET-CT examination and described each of the 5 anatomical régions according to 3 modalities (Presence of suspicious lesion(s); Presence of dubious lesion(s); Absence of suspicious and dubious lesion). The inter-observer reproducibility (inter-pairs of observers) was evaluated for each anatomical region by comparing the interpretations of the two pairs, using the weighted kappa concordance coefficient \[ref = Fleiss J, Levin B, Cho Paik M. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Third ed. 2003.\].Interpretation by B1 after PET-CT examination (1 month after). Interpretation by B2 at the end of the study
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=105 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Thorax region
|
0.7254 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6288 to 0.822
|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Abdomen region
|
0.7854 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6923 to 0.8784
|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Pelvis region
|
0.7597 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6408 to 0.8787
|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Bone region
|
0.6711 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.4239 to 0.9183
|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Nervous system region
|
1 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 1.0 to 1.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearPopulation: Reproducibility was not calculated for 1 patient because 9 area from thorax region were not assessed by the pair of observer B2.
The inter-observer reproducibility of combined PET-CT interpretations has been assessed globally for each patient. Same pairs of observer (B1 and B2) than for the primary endpoint evaluation interpreted the PET-CT examination in a global way and concluded for each patient. A weighted Kappa coefficient has been calculated from an identical methodology to that described for the primary endpoint evaluation. Interpretation by B1 was performed at least 1 month and 1 week after PET-CT examination. Interpretation by B2 was performed at the end of the study
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=104 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Inter-observer (B1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT at a Patient Level
|
0.6528 weighted Kappa coefficient
Interval 0.5194 to 0.7863
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearPopulation: Interpretation by nuclear physician alone was not performed for 1 patient
For each of the 5 anatomical régions (thorax, abdomen, pelvis, bone, nervous system), we evaluated the reproducibility between the interpretations of the PET-CT by the nuclear physician alone (N1) and the independent pair (B2) composed by one nuclear physician and one radiologist . The nuclear physician alone (N1) and the independent pair (B2) interpreted the PET-CT examination independently and described each anatomical region.The inter-observer reproducibility has been evaluated for each anatomical region by comparing the interpretations of the nuclear physician alone and that one of independent pair of nuclear physician and radiologist, using the weighted kappa concordance coefficient \[ref = Fleiss J, Levin B, Cho Paik M. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Third ed. 2003.\].Interpretation by nuclear physician alone (N1) was performed within 1 week of PET-CT examination. Interpretation by B2 was performed at the end of the study
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=104 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Abdomen region
|
0.8153 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.7118 to 0.9187
|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Pelvis region
|
0.7452 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.602 to 0.8885
|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Bone region
|
0.8722 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.7269 to 1.0
|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Thorax region
|
0.8526 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.7733 to 0.9319
|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT by Anatomical Regions
Nervous system region
|
1 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 1.0 to 1.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearPopulation: Interpretation by nuclear physician alone was not performed for 1 patient. Interpretation by the pair of observor B2 was incomplete for 1 patient because 9 area from thorax region were not assessed.
The inter-observer reproducibility of combined PET-CT interpretations has been assessed globally for each patient. The nuclear physician alone (N1) and the independent pair (B2) interpreted the PET-CT examination independently in a global way and concluded for each patient. The inter-observer reproducibility has been evaluated at patient level by comparing the interpretations of the nuclear physician alone and that one of independent pair of nuclear physician and radiologist, using the weighted kappa concordance coefficient \[ref = Fleiss J, Levin B, Cho Paik M. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. Third ed. 2003.\]. Interpretation by nuclear physician alone (N1) was performed within 1 week of PET-CT examination. Interpretation by B2 was performed at the end of the study
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=103 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Inter-observer (N1 and B2) Reproducibility of the PET-CT at a Patient Level
|
0.7859 Weighted kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6561 to 0.9157
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearFor each anatomical region, the reproducibility of the injected CT scan was evaluated. The same radiologist evaluated the two injected CT scans (CT1 and CT2) and interpreted them (Presence of suspicious lesion(s) OR presence of dubious lesion(s) OR absence of suspicious and dubious lesion). Intra-observer reproducibility was analyzed by using the individual analysis by each radiologist. A weighted Kappa concordance coefficient was calculated per anatomical region using a methodology identical to that described for the evaluation of the proncipal endpoint. Interpretation of CT1 was performed befor inclusion. Interpretation of CT2 was performed at the end of the study.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=105 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scan by Anatomical Regions
Bone region
|
-0.0095 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval -0.0227 to 0.0037
|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scan by Anatomical Regions
Thorax region
|
0.8141 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.7129 to 0.9153
|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scan by Anatomical Regions
Abdomen region
|
0.7991 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6951 to 0.9032
|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scan by Anatomical Regions
Pelvis region
|
0.7947 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6326 to 0.9568
|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scan by Anatomical Regions
Nervous system region
|
1 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 1.0 to 1.0
|
SECONDARY outcome
Timeframe: 1 yearThe reproducibility of the injected CT scan was evaluated globally for each patient. The same radiologist evaluated the two injected CT scans (CT1 and CT2) and interpreted them (Presence of suspicious lesion(s) OR presence of dubious lesion(s) OR absence of suspicious and dubious lesion). Intra-observer reproducibility was analyzed by using the individual analysis by each radiologist. A weighted Kappa concordance coefficient was calculated using a methodology identical to that described for the evaluation of the proncipal endpoint. Interpretation of CT1 was performed befor inclusion. Interpretation of CT2 was performed at the end of the study.
Outcome measures
| Measure |
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
n=105 Participants
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan
COMBI TEP : PET / enhanced CT scan: diagnostic imaging exam
|
|---|---|
|
Intra-observer Reproducibility of Injected CT Scanat a Patient Level
|
0.7984 Weighted Kappa concordance coefficient
Interval 0.6708 to 0.926
|
Adverse Events
COMBI TEP : PET / Enhanced CT Scan
Serious adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Other adverse events
Adverse event data not reported
Additional Information
Dr. Anne-Laure Cazeaux, Nuclear physician
Institut Bergonié, Medical Imaging Department
Results disclosure agreements
- Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
- Publication restrictions are in place