Breast CancerNCT01943916
The PIONEER-01 Study of the Imagio Breast Imaging System
A study testing Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) and Imagio gray scale ultrasound in people with Breast Cancer, run by Seno Medical Instruments Inc. at 16 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This is a prospective controlled multi-center study involving gray scale (B-mode) ultrasound vs OA/US (opto-acoustic and gray scale ultrasound) for the visualization of suspicious masses. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) and Imagio gray scale ultrasound
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 2,105 participants
- Where
- 16 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- 21 Dec 2012to 9 Sep 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- female
- 18 years of age or older
- suspicious mass of breast, identified by a health care practitioner within the past 30 days with diagnostic methodology other than conventional ultrasound.
Who cannot join
- presence of a condition or impediment that may interfere with imaging.
- pregnant or lactating
- undergoing neoadjuvant therapy
Trial locations and contacts
16 sites in 1 country.
16 sites in 1 country
United States16 sites
Breast Care Atlanta
Atlanta, Georgia, 30342
Austin Radiological Association
Austin, Texas, 78731
Boca Raton Regional Hospital
Boca Raton, Florida, 33486
Northwestern University
Chicago, Illinois, 60611
Cleveland Clinic, Breast Services DDI Clinical Research
Cleveland, Ohio, 44195
Sally Jobe
Englewood, Colorado, 80112
Solis Women's Health (North Carolina)
Greensboro, North Carolina, 27401
MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Radiology and Breast Imaging
Houston, Texas, 77030
Radnet (Temecula)
Murrieta, California, 92562
Yale University
New Haven, Connecticut, 06510
New York Presbyterian Hospital
New York, New York, 10021
Weinstein Imaging Associates
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15220
Solis Women's Health
Plano, Texas, 75075
Elizabeth Wende Breast Care
Rochester, New York, 14260
Univ. Texas Health Science Center at San Antontio, Breast Imaging Center at the Cancer Therapy Research Center
San Antonio, Texas, 78229
Georgetown University Hospital, Department of Radiology
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20007
About this study
Official title: A Study of Imaging With Opto-acoustics to Diagnose Breast Masses Detected by Mammography and/or Diagnostic Ultrasound: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists
This is a prospective controlled multi-center study involving gray scale (B-mode) ultrasound vs OA/US (opto-acoustic and gray scale ultrasound) for the visualization of suspicious masses. Imagio gray scale and OA image sets will be collected on each enrolled mass and pushed to an Imaging Core Lab for processing and then to a set of Independent Readers who will read the Imagio gray-scale images vs the Imagio OA/US images.
Read the detailed description
Imagio is a multi-modality device, comprised of one probe with the ability to image with diagnostic gray scale (B mode) ultrasound alone and gray scale in conjunction with OA together in a six up image.
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Being tested
- Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US), Imagio gray scale ultrasound
- Keywords
- breast imaging diagnosis, breast ultrasound, Imagio, Seno Medical Instruments, Inc., Seno, opto-acoustics, OA, angiogenesis, blood map
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US)Device
opto-acoustic plus gray scale ultrasound
Imagio gray scale ultrasoundDevice
gray scale ultrasound alone
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) | Experimental | Imagio OA/US (gray scale and opto-acoustic) Receives: Device: Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) |
| Imagio gray scale ultrasound | Experimental | Imagio gray scale ultrasound alone Receives: Device: Imagio gray scale ultrasound |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Specificity Difference Between Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Primary effectiveness endpoint was the difference in specificity for the Imagio OA/US relative to IUS, across all 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth)
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Secondary outcomes (5)
Sensitivity Difference Between Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Sensitivity difference for Imagio OA/US Imagio relative to IUS, across all 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth)
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Specificity for Each Imaging Modality Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale OA/US and Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Specificity for each imaging modality, Imagio OA/US (Imagio) and IUS, across all 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth)
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Sensitivity for Each Imaging Modality Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) and Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Sensitivity for each imaging modality, Imagio OA/US and IUS, across all 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth)
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Downgrade Benign Masses Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Imaging (IUS)
Percentage of reads where breast mass was downgraded from one BI-RADS (BR) category to a lower BR category on the basis of additional information from the Imagio OA/US imaging modality compared to IUS, includes reads of each of 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth). BR categories used in this study: 2, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Upgrade Cancer Masses - Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Imaging (IUS)
Percentage of reads where breast mass was upgraded from one BI-RADS (BR) category to a higher BR category on the basis of additional information from the Imagio optoacoustic plus grayscale (OA/US) imaging modality compared to Imagio grayscale (IUS), includes reads of each of 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth). BR categories used in this study: 2, 3, 4a, 4b, 4c, 5
Measured: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Sep 2013 (estimated)
- Study start21 Dec 2012
- Primary completion9 Sep 2015
- Study completion9 Sep 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 2,105 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Seno Medical Instruments Inc.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01943916
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PIONEER-01
- Status last verified
- Apr 2021
- First submitted
- 12 Sep 2013
- Last updated
- 8 Feb 2023
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
Publications
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Zalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Oraevsky A. Clinical Feasibility Study of Combined Opto-Acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging Modality Providing Co-registered Functional and Anatomical Maps of Breast Tumors. Presented at: 97th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of The Radiological Society of North America; 2011 Nov 28; Chicago, IL.
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, Herzog D, Clingman B, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Oraevsky A. Clinical feasibility of Co-registered Opto-acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging for Differentiation of Breast Tumors. Presented at: Annual Meeting: Society for Nuclear Medicine; 2011 Jun 6; San Antonio, TX.
Zalev J (Ryerson Univ, Toronto, Canada), Kolios MC. Detecting Abnormal Vasculature from Photoacoustic Signals Using Wavelet-packet Features. Poster presented at: SPIE Photonics West Symposium; 2011 Jan 22-27; San Francisco, CA.
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Zalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Smith R, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Hernandez T, Oraevsky A. Feasibility of Co-registered Opto-Acoustic and Ulatrsonic Imaging for Differentiation of Malignant from Benign Breast Tumors. Presented at: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Annual Convention; 2012 March 31; Phoenix, AZ.
Zalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Tsyboulski D, Oraevsky A, Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM. Clinical Feasibility Study of Combined Opto-Acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging Modality Providing Coregistered Functional and Anatomical Maps of Breast Tumors. Presented at: Photons plus Ultrasound: Imaging and Sensing. SPIE/Bios, Photonics West Symposium; 2012 Jan 22; San Francisco, CA.
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Ermilov S, Oraevsky A. Improve Differentiation of Breast Tumors Using Laser Opto-Acoustic Ultrasonic Imaging System. Poster presented at: European Congress of Radiology; 2012 Mar 1-5; Vienna, Austria.
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Stavros T, Ulissey M, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Lavin P, Oraevsky A. Functional Images of Hemoglobin and Blood Oxygen Saturation Co-registered with Ultrasound Provide Accurate Differentiation of Breast Tumors. Presented at: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Annual Convention; 2013 Apr 6-10; New York, NY.
Stavros T, Lerner A, Burak W, Fine R, Boyd B, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Smith R, Zalev J, Ulissey M. Combining B-Mode Ultrasound and Opto-Acoustic Imaging to Evaluate Breast Lesions. Poster presented at: American Society of Breast Surgeons Annual Meeting; 2013 May 1-5; Chicago, IL.
Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Stavros T, Ulissey M, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Lavin P, Oraevsky A. Improved Differentiation of Breast Tumors using Novel Imaging System based on Co-Registered Opto-Acoustic Tomography and Ultrasound. Presented at European Congress of Radiology; 2013 Mar 7-11; Vienna, Austria.
Stavros T, Lerner A, Burak W, Fine R, Boyd B, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Smith R, Zalev J, Ulissey M. Opto-Acoustic Breast Imaging, A New Technology. Poster presented at 23rd Annual National Interdisciplinary Breast Center Conference; 2013 Mar 23-27; Las Vegas, NV.
Zalev J, Clingman B, Smith R, Herzog D, Miller T, Stavros AT, Ermilov S, Conjusteau A, Tsyboulski D, Oraevsky A, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Otto P. Real-time Opto-acoustic Imaging System for Clinical Assessment of Breast Lesions. Presented at: Photons plus Ultrasound: Imaging and Sensing, SPIE/BiOS, Photonics West Symposium; 3 Feb 2013; San Francisco, CA.
Ozcan BB, Xi Y, Dogan BE. Supplemental Optoacoustic Imaging of Breast Masses: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Acad Radiol. 2024 Jan;31(1):121-130. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.08.042. Epub 2023 Sep 23.
PubMed 37748954
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 8 Feb 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Study of Imaging With Opto-acoustics to Diagnose Breast Masses Detected by Mammography and/or Diagnostic Ultrasound: A New Evaluation Tool for Radiologists
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01943916
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PIONEER-01
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Keywords
- breast imaging diagnosis, breast ultrasound, Imagio, Seno Medical Instruments, Inc., Seno, opto-acoustics, OA, angiogenesis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 2,105 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Seno Medical Instruments Inc.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 21 Dec 2012 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 9 Sep 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- 9 Sep 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Sep 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 26 May 2021
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This is a prospective controlled multi-center study involving gray scale (B-mode) ultrasound vs OA/US (opto-acoustic and gray scale ultrasound) for the visualization of suspicious masses. Imagio gray scale and OA image sets will be collected on each enrolled mass and pushed to an Imaging Core Lab for processing and then to a set of Independent Readers who will read the Imagio gray-scale images vs the Imagio OA/US images.
Detailed description
Imagio is a multi-modality device, comprised of one probe with the ability to image with diagnostic gray scale (B mode) ultrasound alone and gray scale in conjunction with OA together in a six up image.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Sequential
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) | Experimental | Device: Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US)Imagio OA/US (gray scale and opto-acoustic) |
| Imagio gray scale ultrasound | Experimental | Device: Imagio gray scale ultrasoundImagio gray scale ultrasound alone |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- female
- 18 years of age or older
- suspicious mass of breast, identified by a health care practitioner within the past 30 days with diagnostic methodology other than conventional ultrasound.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- presence of a condition or impediment that may interfere with imaging.
- pregnant or lactating
- undergoing neoadjuvant therapy
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US)opto-acoustic plus gray scale ultrasound | Device | Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) |
| Imagio gray scale ultrasoundgray scale ultrasound alone | Device | Imagio gray scale ultrasound |
Primary outcome
Specificity Difference Between Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Primary effectiveness endpoint was the difference in specificity for the Imagio OA/US relative to IUS, across all 7 independent readers; both imaging modalities used in each subject (subject as own control); results for each imaging modality compared to biopsy diagnosis or 12-month follow-up ruling of benign as determined by truth panel (ground truth)
5 secondary outcomes
Sensitivity Difference Between Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Specificity for Each Imaging Modality Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale OA/US and Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Sensitivity for Each Imaging Modality Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) and Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Downgrade Benign Masses Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Imaging (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Upgrade Cancer Masses - Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Imaging (IUS)
Time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 8 Feb 2023.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Zalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Oraevsky A. Clinical Feasibility Study of Combined Opto-Acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging Modality Providing Co-registered Functional and Anatomical Maps of Breast Tumors. Presented at: 97th Scientific Assembly and Annual Meeting of The Radiological Society of North America; 2011 Nov 28; Chicago, IL.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, Herzog D, Clingman B, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Oraevsky A. Clinical feasibility of Co-registered Opto-acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging for Differentiation of Breast Tumors. Presented at: Annual Meeting: Society for Nuclear Medicine; 2011 Jun 6; San Antonio, TX.
- BackgroundZalev J (Ryerson Univ, Toronto, Canada), Kolios MC. Detecting Abnormal Vasculature from Photoacoustic Signals Using Wavelet-packet Features. Poster presented at: SPIE Photonics West Symposium; 2011 Jan 22-27; San Francisco, CA.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Zalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Smith R, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Hernandez T, Oraevsky A. Feasibility of Co-registered Opto-Acoustic and Ulatrsonic Imaging for Differentiation of Malignant from Benign Breast Tumors. Presented at: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Annual Convention; 2012 March 31; Phoenix, AZ.
- BackgroundZalev J, Herzog D, Clingman B, Miller T, Ermilov S, Nadvoretsky V, Conjusteau A, Su R, Tsyboulski D, Oraevsky A, Otto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM. Clinical Feasibility Study of Combined Opto-Acoustic and Ultrasonic Imaging Modality Providing Coregistered Functional and Anatomical Maps of Breast Tumors. Presented at: Photons plus Ultrasound: Imaging and Sensing. SPIE/Bios, Photonics West Symposium; 2012 Jan 22; San Francisco, CA.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth NC, McCorvey BM, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Ermilov S, Oraevsky A. Improve Differentiation of Breast Tumors Using Laser Opto-Acoustic Ultrasonic Imaging System. Poster presented at: European Congress of Radiology; 2012 Mar 1-5; Vienna, Austria.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Stavros T, Ulissey M, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Lavin P, Oraevsky A. Functional Images of Hemoglobin and Blood Oxygen Saturation Co-registered with Ultrasound Provide Accurate Differentiation of Breast Tumors. Presented at: American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine Annual Convention; 2013 Apr 6-10; New York, NY.
- BackgroundStavros T, Lerner A, Burak W, Fine R, Boyd B, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Smith R, Zalev J, Ulissey M. Combining B-Mode Ultrasound and Opto-Acoustic Imaging to Evaluate Breast Lesions. Poster presented at: American Society of Breast Surgeons Annual Meeting; 2013 May 1-5; Chicago, IL.
- BackgroundOtto P, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Stavros T, Ulissey M, Herzog D, Clingman B, Zalev J, Lavin P, Oraevsky A. Improved Differentiation of Breast Tumors using Novel Imaging System based on Co-Registered Opto-Acoustic Tomography and Ultrasound. Presented at European Congress of Radiology; 2013 Mar 7-11; Vienna, Austria.
- BackgroundStavros T, Lerner A, Burak W, Fine R, Boyd B, Miller T, Herzog D, Clingman B, Smith R, Zalev J, Ulissey M. Opto-Acoustic Breast Imaging, A New Technology. Poster presented at 23rd Annual National Interdisciplinary Breast Center Conference; 2013 Mar 23-27; Las Vegas, NV.
- BackgroundZalev J, Clingman B, Smith R, Herzog D, Miller T, Stavros AT, Ermilov S, Conjusteau A, Tsyboulski D, Oraevsky A, Kist K, Dornbluth C, Otto P. Real-time Opto-acoustic Imaging System for Clinical Assessment of Breast Lesions. Presented at: Photons plus Ultrasound: Imaging and Sensing, SPIE/BiOS, Photonics West Symposium; 3 Feb 2013; San Francisco, CA.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37748954Ozcan BB, Xi Y, Dogan BE. Supplemental Optoacoustic Imaging of Breast Masses: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis. Acad Radiol. 2024 Jan;31(1):121-130. doi: 10.1016/j.acra.2023.08.042. Epub 2023 Sep 23.
- Sponsor websiteLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Breast Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingPhase 2
Gene Signatures to Guide HR+MBC Therapy in a Diverse Cohort
Invasive Mammary Carcinoma, Metastatic Breast Cancer
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparison of Reliability, Time Cost, and Participant Comfort of Lymphedema Assessments in Upper Extremity
Lymphedema, Upper Extremity Lymphedema
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Camrelizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Combination With or Without Famitinib as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Participants With Triple Negative Breast Cancer (BCTOP-T-N01)
TNBC - Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Whether Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib is as Effective as Chemotherapy Followed by Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib for the Treatment of High Anatomic Stage Breast Cancer With Low Recurrence Risk, The RxFINE-Low Trial
Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
16 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Imagio OA/US (US and OA/US) and Imagio gray scale ultrasound in people with Breast Cancer, run by Seno Medical Instruments Inc. at 16 sites in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 8 Feb 2023. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 16 sites in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 26 May 2021). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Specificity Difference Between Imagio Optoacoustic Plus Gray-scale (OA/US) vs Imagio Gray-scale Ultrasound (IUS) (time frame: Baseline to 12 months +/- 30 days follow-up). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01943916, which also lists 12 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 8 Feb 2023.