Contrast-harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound (CH-EUS) for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

January 9, 2013 updated by: Gincul Rodica, Société Française d'Endoscopie Digestive

Contrast-harmonic Endoscopic Ultrasound (CH-EUS) for the Diagnosis of Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma: Results of the First Multicenter Prospective Study With Intra- and Interobserver Concordances Evaluation

Ductal adenocarcinoma is the most frequent pancreatic solid lesion and the most common tumor of the pancreas. Given its poor prognosis and the major therapeutic consequences, the discrimination between PA and other pancreatic solid lesions is mandatory. EUS is admitted as the most sensitive imaging procedure for the detection and characterization of pancreatic tumors [1-3]. Nevertheless it remains difficult to differentiate, on morphological features, PA from other solid masses. For 15 years, endoscopic ultrasound fine needle aspiration (EUS-FNA) has demonstrated its efficiency for tissue sampling and cyto-histologic diagnosis of PA. However, the negative predictive value (NPV) for the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) remains low (30-70%) in the published prospective series [4]. So, in case of negative result, the choice between surgery and follow-up remains difficult. Additional criteria to get the decision are then warranted.

The assessment of pancreatic tumor enhancement using ultrasound contrast agents (UCAs) in real time with imaging specific methods seems useful to improve their characterization [4-8] either by contrast-enhanced EUS (CE-EUS) or, more recently, by contrast-enhanced harmonic EUS (CH-EUS).

The aims of this prospective multicenter study is:

  1. to compare the NPV of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) and EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of PA;
  2. to assess the intra- and inter-observer concordances of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA.

Study Overview

Status

Completed

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

100 patients with a solid pancreatic mass of indeterminate origin must be prospectively included in 3 French centers Exclusion criteria: presence of a cystic component greater than 25 % of the total volume of the lesion, pregnancy, lactation, age <18 years, and usual contraindications to SonoVue® injection.

All EUS procedure will be performed by 5 experienced endosonographers as follows:

  1. Conventional gray-scale B-mode and conventional power Doppler EUS to assess the EUS characteristics of the pancreatic lesion (localization, size, echogenicity, cystic component), the aspect of the surrounding parenchyma as well as the presence of proximal duct dilation, vessels infiltration, and collateral veins; tumor and nodes (uTN) staging. A systematic video of the 2 modes will be recorded.
  2. CH-EUS will be performed to assess the microvascularization of the lesion and of the surrounding parenchyma: the echoendoscope will be placed in front of the pancreatic lesion and the contrast-specific mode will be engaged with simultaneous monitoring by fundamental B mode. A mecanical index (MI) of 0.4 will be chose based on previous studies [4-6]. An intravenous 4.8 ml SonoVue® bolus injection will be administrated through an antecubital vein, using a 20 Gauges catheter, followed by 20 ml saline flush. Examination of pancreatic lesion will be evaluated in real time and a video of each examination will be record and store. The examination lasted up to 3 minutes after SonoVue® injection to ensure full examination of the lesion in arterial (hyper echogenicity of the aorta, superior mesenteric, hepatic or splenic arteries) and venous phases (hyper echogenicity of the splenic-mesenteric-portal vessels). The pancreatic lesion enhancement pattern will be compare to the adjacent pancreatic parenchyma. We differentiated 3 patterns: hypo-, iso- or hyperenhancement. The operator classified the lesion as pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) or non PA. Based on previous pilot studies, lesion in hypoenhancement consider as PA while lesion in hyper or isoenhancement as non-PA [4-6]. In case of tumors with mixed pattern the lesion was considered as PA if a significant area (>10% of the surface) is in hypoenhancement.
  3. EUS-FNA: a specimen will be obtain from all lesions using a 22 Gauge needle. Final diagnosis will be based on pathological findings obtained either surgically or by EUS-FNA. In the absence of histological evidence, follow-up (F-U) of patients for 12 months will be carried out. The diagnosis of PA ruled out if no sign of malignancy (disease regression or absence of disease progression) present at the end of F-U.
  4. Images reviewing: at the end of the study an anonymous digital video recording of each procedure including B mode, power Doppler mode and CHE mode will be performed.

Statistical analysis. The McNemar test will be use to compare the CH-EUS performance for the diagnosis of PA to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis. Sensitivity (Se), specificity (Spe), predictive positive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) will be calculate. A p value of 0.05 considered statistically significant. Intra- and interobserver agreements of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA will assess using kappa statistics and associated 95% CI. Depending on Kappa values, agreement will considered as minor (0.01-0.20), fair (0.21-0.40), moderate (0.41-0.60), high (0.61-0.80), or almost perfect (0.81-1.00), beyond chance.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Actual)

100

Phase

  • Not Applicable

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

      • Paris, France, 75006
        • Société Française d'Endoscopie Digrestive

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

18 years and older (ADULT, OLDER_ADULT)

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

No

Genders Eligible for Study

All

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

  • patients with a solid pancreatic mass of indeterminate origin

Exclusion Criteria:

  • presence of a cystic component greater than 25 % of the total volume of the lesion, pregnancy, lactation, age <18 years, and usual contraindications to SonoVue® injection

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: NA
  • Interventional Model: SINGLE_GROUP
  • Masking: NONE

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
EXPERIMENTAL: SonoVue®

Non randomised study

Sonovue 4,8 ml intravenous administration, in 1 bolus, during the EUS examination

An intravenous 4.8 ml SonoVue® bolus injection was administered to each patient during the procedure
Other Names:
  • soufre hexafluorure

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
negative predictive value (NPV) of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) for the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA)
Time Frame: one year
To evaluate the NPV of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis
one year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Measure Description
Time Frame
to asses intra-observer concordances of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA
Time Frame: two days
an anonymous digital video recording of each procedure including B mode, power Doppler mode and CHE mode was created. A 2-days joint work session was organized with 7 endosonographers: the 5 senior endoscopists who had performed the examinations and 2 juniors. To harmonizing the interpretation a short teaching session was done with some cases not included in the series. The different types of enhancement of solid pancreatic masses histologically proven (PA, benign and malignant NET, pancreatic metastases, and focal mass of CP) were shown. During day 1 the 7 operators reviewed independently and in a random order all 100 anonymous videotapes. One senior and 1 junior reviewed all videotapes a second time in a different random order. Each observer had to independently classify the lesion as PA or not. During day 2 a joint review was done with the cases where a discrepancy of interpretation has been observed. A final consensus for the diagnosis was proposed if possible.
two days
to asses inter-observer concordances of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA
Time Frame: two days
an anonymous digital video recording of each procedure including B mode, power Doppler mode and CHE mode was created. A 2-days joint work session was organized with 7 endosonographers: the 5 senior endoscopists who had performed the examinations and 2 juniors. To harmonizing the interpretation a short teaching session was done with some cases not included in the series. The different types of enhancement of solid pancreatic masses histologically proven (PA, benign and malignant NET, pancreatic metastases, and focal mass of CP) were shown. During day 1 the 7 operators reviewed independently and in a random order all 100 anonymous videotapes. One senior and 1 junior reviewed all videotapes a second time in a different random order. Each observer had to independently classify the lesion as PA or not. During day 2 a joint review was done with the cases where a discrepancy of interpretation has been observed. A final consensus for the diagnosis was proposed if possible.
two days
sensibility (Se) of contrast-enhanced endoscopic ultrasound (CH-EUS) for the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA)
Time Frame: one year
To evaluate the Se of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA) to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis
one year
Specificity (Spe) of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA)
Time Frame: one year
To evaluate the specificity (Spe) of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis
one year
Positive predictive value (PPV) of CH-EUS for diagnosis of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PA)
Time Frame: one year
To evaluate the PPV of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis
one year
Accuracy of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA
Time Frame: one year
To evaluate the accuracy of CH-EUS for the diagnosis of PA to EUS-FNA and final diagnosis value (PPV)
one year
Accuracy of CH-EUS compared to EUS-FNA
Time Frame: one year
To compare the accuracy of CH-EUS and EUS-FNA for the diagnosis of PA with 95% confidence intervals (95%CI)
one year

Collaborators and Investigators

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

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

July 1, 2009

Primary Completion (ACTUAL)

September 1, 2010

Study Completion (ACTUAL)

September 1, 2010

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

January 3, 2013

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 9, 2013

First Posted (ESTIMATE)

January 10, 2013

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (ESTIMATE)

January 10, 2013

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

January 9, 2013

Last Verified

January 1, 2013

More Information

Terms related to this study

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 Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

Clinical Trials on SonoVue®

Subscribe