Pleural Effusion, MalignantNCT03272997
The Value of PET-CT in Pleural Effusions
An observational study of Pleural Effusion, Malignant, run by Naestved Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
Trial summary
The investigators aim is to asses the diagnostic power of 18F-FDG PET-CT in discriminating malignant from nonmalignant causes in patients with a recurrent unilateral pleural effusion of unknown origin. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 16 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Pleural Effusion, Malignant
- How many people
- 112 participants
- Where
- 1 siteDenmark
- Study dates
- 1 Oct 2017to 30 Jan 2019
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
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 16 years and older
- All sexes
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: All patients with a unilateral pleural effusion of unknown origin examined with the above
Who may be able to join
- Thoracocentesis
- Chest X-ray
- CT scanning
- PET-CT scanning
Who cannot join
- Missing data
- Lung cancer
- Thoracic malignancies
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: The Diagnostic Power of 18F-FDG PET-CT Scanning for Discriminating Malignant From Non-malignant Causes in Unilateral Pleural Effusions
The investigators aim is to asses the diagnostic power of 18F-FDG PET-CT in discriminating malignant from nonmalignant causes in patients with a recurrent unilateral pleural effusion of unknown origin.
Read the detailed description
The investigators follow the STARD 2015 guideline for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies.
The investigators will review the hospital's administrative database of patients who underwent a thoracocentesis from January 2013 to January 2015. Patients at Department of Respiratory Medicine, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde and Department of Respiratory Medicine, Naestved Hospital, Region Zealand, Denmark (two large respiratory centres with specialised functions) is eligible for inclusion. Patients are included irrespective of cytology and chemical analysis.
The investigators will review the patients' medical records and images retrospectively. To reduce the number of false negatives, the investigators complete a 1-year follow-up.
Patients older than 16 years are included, irrespective of smoking history and comorbidities, if both thoracocenteses, chest x-ray, a CT-scanning and a PET-CT scanning is performed. Exclusion criteria are previously diagnosed lung cancer, thoracic malignancy or incomplete data.
Classification of results The investigators chose the combination of investigations recommended by the internationally acknowledged BTS guideline, which is endorsed by the Danish Society of Respiratory Medicine. Thoracocentesis, chest x-ray, CT findings and PET-CT findings is categorized as either normal (i.e. not suggestive of any aetiology of the unilateral pleural effusion), suggestive of other lung pathology or suggestive of malignancy (i.e. representing a possible aetiology of the unilateral pleural effusion).
The thoracocentesis is classified as malignant if cytological examination revealed malignant cells. The chest x-ray is classified as malignant if suspicion of malignant disease is not rejected. The CT findings are classified as malignant according to Leung et. al. for pleural abnormalities (circumferential pleural thickening, nodular pleural thickening, parietal pleural thickening > 1 cm and mediastinal pleural involvement) and The Fleischner Society for parenchymal abnormalities (nodules > 8 mm). The PET-CT findings are classified as malignant if any findings suspicious for malignancy.
CT and PET-CT images, as well as the scan reports by the radiologist and the nuclear medicine physician, is reviewed by two experienced pulmonologists. They are blinded to all patient information, including final diagnosis.
The final diagnosis, the reference standard, is extracted from the patients' medical records. When no diagnosis is found, two investigators agree on a consensus diagnosis based on all investigation results. If no reasonable diagnosis can be established based on the findings, the patient case is categorized as having no final diagnosis. These cases are treated as a worst-case scenario, i.e. patients with a malignant disease are treated as false negative, and patients without malignant disease are treated as false positive.
Statistics Data are presented as frequencies and/or mean ± standard deviation (SD). Test characteristics were compared using McNemar's test with Bonferroni correction (two-sided level of significance < o.o5). Diagnostic power of thoracocentesis, chest x-ray, CT-scanning, PET-CT scanning and the combination are calculated. Diagnostic power is defined as true positive, true negative, false positive, false negative, sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio+, likelihood ratio-, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy (TP+TN)/(TP+FP+TN+FN).
The combined sensitivity will be calculated using the formula:
Sensitivitytest A + Sensitivitytest B + Sensitivitytest … - (Sensitivitytest A x Sensitivitytest B x Sensitivitytest …)
The combined specificity will be calculated using the formula:
Specificitytest A x Specificitytest B x Specificitytest… Data were analyzed using STATA (StataCorp LLC, Version 15.0, College Station, Texas, USA).
- Conditions
- Pleural Effusion, Malignant
- Keywords
- Positron emission thomography, Computed tomography, Sensitivity, Specificity
- Medical subject headings
- Pleural Effusion, Malignant, Hypersensitivity
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Sensitivity PET-CT
TP / (TP + FN)
Measured: 1 year
Secondary outcomes (14)
CT-Specificity
TN / (TN+FP)
Measured: 1 year
PET-CT-Specificity
TN / (TN+FP)
Measured: 1 year
CT-Sensitivity
TP / (TP + FN)
Measured: 1 year
Comparison of the diagnostic power
McNemars' test with Bonferroni
Measured: 1 year
CT-Likelihood ratio+
LR+ = sensitivity / (1-specificity)
Measured: 1 Year
PET-CT-Likelihood ratio+
LR+ = sensitivity / (1-specificity)
Measured: 1 Year
CT-Likelihood ratio-
LR- = (1-sensitivity) / specificity
Measured: 1 year
PET-CT-Likelihood ratio-
LR- = (1-sensitivity) / specificity
Measured: 1 year
CT-positive predictive value
PPV =TP / (TP+ FP)
Measured: 1 year
PET-CT-positive predictive value
PPV =TP / (TP+ FP)
Measured: 1 year
CT-negative predictive value
TN/ (TN + FN)
Measured: 1 year
PET-CT-negative predictive value
TN/ (TN + FN)
Measured: 1 year
CT-Diagnostic accuracy
(TP+TN) / (TP+TN+FP+FN)
Measured: 1 year
PET-CT-Diagnostic accuracy
(TP+TN) / (TP+TN+FP+FN)
Measured: 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Sep 2017
- Study start1 Oct 2017
- Primary completion31 Jan 2018
- Study completion30 Jan 2019
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for Pleural Effusion, MalignantStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 112 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Naestved Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Simon Reuter, Naestved Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03272997
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PET-CT in UPE
- Status last verified
- Dec 2020
- First submitted
- 30 Aug 2017
- Last updated
- 17 Dec 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 17 Dec 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Diagnostic Power of 18F-FDG PET-CT Scanning for Discriminating Malignant From Non-malignant Causes in Unilateral Pleural Effusions
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03272997
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PET-CT in UPE
- Conditions
- Pleural Effusion, Malignant
- Keywords
- Positron emission thomography, Computed tomography, Sensitivity, Specificity
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 112 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Naestved HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Oct 2017 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jan 2018 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jan 2019 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Sep 2017 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The investigators aim is to asses the diagnostic power of 18F-FDG PET-CT in discriminating malignant from nonmalignant causes in patients with a recurrent unilateral pleural effusion of unknown origin.
Detailed description
The investigators follow the STARD 2015 guideline for reporting diagnostic accuracy studies.
The investigators will review the hospital's administrative database of patients who underwent a thoracocentesis from January 2013 to January 2015. Patients at Department of Respiratory Medicine, Zealand University Hospital, Roskilde and Department of Respiratory Medicine, Naestved Hospital, Region Zealand, Denmark (two large respiratory centres with specialised functions) is eligible for inclusion. Patients are included irrespective of cytology and chemical analysis.
The investigators will review the patients' medical records and images retrospectively. To reduce the number of false negatives, the investigators complete a 1-year follow-up.
Patients older than 16 years are included, irrespective of smoking history and comorbidities, if both thoracocenteses, chest x-ray, a CT-scanning and a PET-CT scanning is performed. Exclusion criteria are previously diagnosed lung cancer, thoracic malignancy or incomplete data.
Classification of results The investigators chose the combination of investigations recommended by the internationally acknowledged BTS guideline, which is endorsed by the Danish Society of Respiratory Medicine. Thoracocentesis, chest x-ray, CT findings and PET-CT findings is categorized as either normal (i.e. not suggestive of any aetiology of the unilateral pleural effusion), suggestive of other lung pathology or suggestive of malignancy (i.e. representing a possible aetiology of the unilateral pleural effusion).
The thoracocentesis is classified as malignant if cytological examination revealed malignant cells. The chest x-ray is classified as malignant if suspicion of malignant disease is not rejected. The CT findings are classified as malignant according to Leung et. al. for pleural abnormalities (circumferential pleural thickening, nodular pleural thickening, parietal pleural thickening > 1 cm and mediastinal pleural involvement) and The Fleischner Society for parenchymal abnormalities (nodules > 8 mm). The PET-CT findings are classified as malignant if any findings suspicious for malignancy.
CT and PET-CT images, as well as the scan reports by the radiologist and the nuclear medicine physician, is reviewed by two experienced pulmonologists. They are blinded to all patient information, including final diagnosis.
The final diagnosis, the reference standard, is extracted from the patients' medical records. When no diagnosis is found, two investigators agree on a consensus diagnosis based on all investigation results. If no reasonable diagnosis can be established based on the findings, the patient case is categorized as having no final diagnosis. These cases are treated as a worst-case scenario, i.e. patients with a malignant disease are treated as false negative, and patients without malignant disease are treated as false positive.
Statistics Data are presented as frequencies and/or mean ± standard deviation (SD). Test characteristics were compared using McNemar's test with Bonferroni correction (two-sided level of significance < o.o5). Diagnostic power of thoracocentesis, chest x-ray, CT-scanning, PET-CT scanning and the combination are calculated. Diagnostic power is defined as true positive, true negative, false positive, false negative, sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio+, likelihood ratio-, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and diagnostic accuracy (TP+TN)/(TP+FP+TN+FN).
The combined sensitivity will be calculated using the formula:
Sensitivitytest A + Sensitivitytest B + Sensitivitytest … - (Sensitivitytest A x Sensitivitytest B x Sensitivitytest …)
The combined specificity will be calculated using the formula:
Specificitytest A x Specificitytest B x Specificitytest… Data were analyzed using STATA (StataCorp LLC, Version 15.0, College Station, Texas, USA).
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 16 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- All patients with a unilateral pleural effusion of unknown origin examined with the above
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Thoracocentesis
- Chest X-ray
- CT scanning
- PET-CT scanning
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Missing data
- Lung cancer
- Thoracic malignancies
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Sensitivity PET-CT
Time frame: 1 year
TP / (TP + FN)
14 secondary outcomes
CT-Specificity
Time frame: 1 year
PET-CT-Specificity
Time frame: 1 year
CT-Sensitivity
Time frame: 1 year
Comparison of the diagnostic power
Time frame: 1 year
CT-Likelihood ratio+
Time frame: 1 Year
PET-CT-Likelihood ratio+
Time frame: 1 Year
CT-Likelihood ratio-
Time frame: 1 year
PET-CT-Likelihood ratio-
Time frame: 1 year
CT-positive predictive value
Time frame: 1 year
PET-CT-positive predictive value
Time frame: 1 year
CT-negative predictive value
Time frame: 1 year
PET-CT-negative predictive value
Time frame: 1 year
CT-Diagnostic accuracy
Time frame: 1 year
PET-CT-Diagnostic accuracy
Time frame: 1 year
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 17 Dec 2020.
Related trials for Pleural Effusion, Malignant
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Union-LC-MPE Cohort:A Multicenter Cohort Study on Diagnosis and Prognosis of Malignant Pleural Effusion in Lung Cance
Malignant Pleural Effusions (Mpe), Lung Cancer (Diagnosis)
RecruitingObservational study
UNC Pleural Fluid Registry
Lung Cancer, Lung Infection
Active, not recruitingPhase 2
Intrapleural Catheter Daily Versus Three Times a Week Drainage
Advanced Cancer, Pleural Effusion
RecruitingObservational study
Indwelling Pleural Catheters With or Without Doxycycline in Treating Patients With Malignant Pleural Effusions
Pleural Neoplasm
Recruiting
Safety and Feasibility of Medical Thoracoscopy Using Single-use Flexible Bronchoscope Versus SemiRigid Pleuroscope in Pleural Effusion
Malignant Pleural Effusions (Mpe), Medical Thoracoscopy
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.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Pleural Effusion, Malignant, run by Naestved Hospital at 1 site in Denmark.
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 4 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 17 Dec 2020. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in Denmark. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Sensitivity PET-CT (time frame: 1 year). It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 17 Dec 2020.