Coronary MDCTA With Iopamidol Injection 370

October 18, 2012 updated by: Bracco Diagnostics, Inc

A Phase II Multicenter Randomized Double Blind Dose Finding Study of Iopamidol Injection 370 in Multidetector Computed Tomographic Angiography (MDCTA) in Patients With Suspected Coronary Artery Stenosis

Determine the validity and compare the visualization of arterial segments obtained with 3 doses of iopamidol to determine dose for further investigation in future trials.

Study Overview

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

210

Phase

  • Phase 2

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Locations

    • New Jersey
      • Princeton, New Jersey, United States, 08540
        • Bracco Diagnostics

Participation Criteria

Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.

Eligibility Criteria

Ages Eligible for Study

28 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • Provide informed consent
  • At least 30 years of age
  • Weight less than 250 lbs
  • Known or suspected coronary artery disease and suspected to have significant coronary artery stenosis
  • Undergo MDCTA scan
  • Undergo coronary angiography within 2 weeks of MDCTA scan

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Hx of hypersensitivity to iodinated contrast agents
  • Known or suspected hyperthyroidism or pheochromocytoma
  • Renal impairment
  • History of coronary artery stent placement or bypass grafts
  • Unstable
  • Pregnant or lactating

Study Plan

This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.

How is the study designed?

Design Details

  • Primary Purpose: Diagnostic
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Triple

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Experimental: Isovue 370, 70 mL
iopamidol injection 370, 70 mL
70 mL of iopamidol injection 370 injected at a rate of >=4 mL/second
Other Names:
  • Isovue
Experimental: Isovue 370, 80 mL
iopamidol injection 370, 80 mL
80 mL of iopamidol injection 370 injected at a rate of >=4 mL/second
Other Names:
  • Isovue
Experimental: Isovue 370, 90 mL
iopamidol injection 370, 90 mL
90 mL of iopamidol injection 370 injected at a rate of >=4 mL/second
Other Names:
  • Isovue

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Diagnostic Quality of Visualization of Coronary Arteries, Off-Site Reader 1
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.
Immediately post dose
Diagnostic Quality of Visualization of Coronary Arteries, Off-Site Reader 2
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.
Immediately post dose
Diagnostic Quality of Visualization of Coronary Arteries, Off-Site Reader 3
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For all technically adequate coronary artery segments, each reader was to assess whether each segment was visualized to a quality that was adequate for accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of stenosis. An adequate quality for the accurate diagnosis of the presence and severity of coronary artery stenosis was comprised of 2 basic features: 1) no more than mild blurring of the spatial distinction between the vessel wall and lumen, and 2) a readily visible distinction in image contrast between calcified plaque, enhanced vessel lumen, and uncalcified vessel wall or plaque.
Immediately post dose
Contrast Density (CD) Measurements, Off-Site Reader 1
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.
Immediately post dose
Contrast Density (CD) Measurements, Off-Site Reader 2
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.
Immediately post dose
Contrast Density (CD) Measurements, Off-Site Reader 3
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For this assessment, each off-site reader was to place regions of interest (ROIs) into the lumens of the mid-portion of the left main coronary artery (LM) (segment number 5), and into the mid-portion of segment number 1 of the right coronary artery (RCA). The mean Hounsfield Units levels and standard deviations (SD) for those 2 ROIs were to be recorded by the reader.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 1 - Sensitivity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 1 - Specificity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 2 - Sensitivity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 2 - Specificity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 3 - Sensitivity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of sensitivity [TP/(TP+FN)] is presented.
Immediately post dose
Validity (Sensitivity and Specificity), Off-Site Reader 3 - Specificity
Time Frame: Immediately post dose
For each technically adequate coronary artery, the readers assessed or excluded the presence of coronary artery stenoses. If more than one stenosis was present in a single vessel, the readers recorded the most significant stenosis. Based on a match or mismatch between computed tomographic angiography (CTA) and coronary angiography as assessed by the adjudicator, each vessel diagnosis by CTA was defined as true negative (TN), false positive (FP), false negative (FN), or true positive (TP) based on coronary angiography findings. Technical inadequacy by multi-detector CTA was counted as FN or FP depending on the diagnostic results from conventional angiography. The percentage (%) of specificity [TN/(TN+FP)] is presented.
Immediately post dose

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
Number of Participants Who Experienced Adverse Events With Incidence of 5% or Greater
Time Frame: up to 72 hours post dose
Participants who received investigational product (iopamidol injection) and experienced an adverse event (AE). See Adverse Events module for further details.
up to 72 hours post dose

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Investigators

  • Study Director: Jiefen Yao, M.D., Bracco Diagnostics, Inc

Study record dates

These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.

Study Major Dates

Study Start

November 1, 2007

Primary Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2010

Study Completion (Actual)

May 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

November 13, 2007

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

November 14, 2007

First Posted (Estimate)

November 15, 2007

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Estimate)

October 24, 2012

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

October 18, 2012

Last Verified

October 1, 2012

More Information

Terms related to this study

Other Study ID Numbers

  • IOP 108
  • NCT00558792 (Registry Identifier: clinicaltrials.gov)

This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.

Clinical Trials on Coronary Artery Disease

Clinical Trials on Isovue 370, 70 mL

3
Subscribe