Rectal CancerRECTOPETNCT03846882
FDG - PET / MRI in Patients With Rectal Cancer
An observational study of Rectal Cancer and Lymph Node Metastases, run by Region Västerbotten at 1 site in Sweden.
Trial summary
The combination of FDG-PET/CT and MRI at staging of rectal cancer in diagnosis is currently very little studied. The investigator have a unique opportunity to study this. Hypothetically, with PET/MR as one hybrid imaging method, alternatively as an additional method, it could increase the accuracy of rectal cancer of… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Rectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastases
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSweden
- Study dates
- 1 Dec 2015to 31 Dec 2023
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: With an estimated 20% prevalence of lymphoma metastases, an expected sensitivity of 90%, an expected specificity of 80% and 80% statistical strength, and 95% confidence interval, 307 glands are required for sensitivity and 691 glands for specificity. The investigator expect to identify 8 glands per patient, which means that about 39 patients for the sensitivity and about 87 patients for the specificity is needed. The investigator round up the number of patients to 100 to compensate for any failure in the follow-up.
Who may be able to join
- verified rectal cancer of intermediate or high risk type, scheduled for surgery (non-acute surgery)
Who cannot join
- kidney dysfunction
- any other contraindications for contrast agents or examination with MRi or FDG-PET/CT
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Sweden1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Department of Radology
Umeå
Miriam Rutegård, MD, 0046907850000, miriam.rutegard@diagrad.umu.se
Martin Rutegård, MD, PhD
About this study
Official title: The Value of PET / MRI for the Assessment of Lymph Node Metastasis and Other Prognostic Factors in Patients With Rectal Cancer
The combination of FDG-PET/CT and MRI at staging of rectal cancer in diagnosis is currently very little studied. The investigator have a unique opportunity to study this. Hypothetically, with PET/MR as one hybrid imaging method, alternatively as an additional method, it could increase the accuracy of rectal cancer of moderate and high risk type, especially at primary N-staging, but also in assessing other important prognostic factors such as T-staging, peritoneal involvement, metastasis to lateral lymph nodes, EMVI and MRF involvement. The same reasoning applies to the assessment of tumor regression after CRT.
In the study, PET/MR is compared with PET/CT, diagnostic CT and MRI to evaluate the additional value of the hybrid imaging PET/MRI. The investigator also plan to evaluate how immunological, proliferative and prognostic biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue correlate with the radiological findings, and if the combination biomarker and radiology can provide additional prognostic information.
Read the detailed description
Today, there is a variety of treatment options in diagnosed rectal cancer. The standard treatment is surgery with removal of the tumour including surrounding fat and lymph nodes in a package. Prior to surgery, the patient may be given a shorter or longer radiation treatment, the latter in combination with cytostatics, depending on staging at the time of diagnosis. Cytostatic drugs can also be given post surgery. The choice of treatment for the individual patient is based on the assessment of the imaging, ie conventional X-ray, ultrasound, computed tomography, (CT), Magnet Resonance Tomography Imaging (MRI) and Positron Emission Tomography in combination with CT (PET/CT). An accurate staging assessment is crucial for adequate treatment of rectal cancer patients to avoid over treatment, which in itself causes unnecessary suffering, or under treatment with increased risk of relapse. With today's methods, tumor size, overgrowth of other organs and spread to other organs such as liver and lung can be reasonable assessed. On the other hand, there is great uncertainty when assessing spread to lymph nodes. Better safety is also needed for other prognostically important factors such as tumor involvement of the mesorectal fasciae (MRF), i.e. the rectum surrounding the tumor, and tumor growth in venous vessels outside the intramural invasion of the intestinal wall, EMVI.
Hybrid imaging with PET combined with magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MR) is a novel method and there are currently no published studies comparing the outcome of fluoro-deoxy glucose (FDG) -PET/MR with CT, MR, PET/CT at staging of rectal cancer, both primarily and after radiation and cytostatics treatment (CRT). In this study, the investigator plan to evaluate the additional value for PET/MR in rectal cancer. Only patients to be operated are included and microscopic examination of the preparation, histopathology, will be the reference method with which survey data from the imaging methods are compared. The investigator also want to evaluate the relationship between the radiological findings and biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue to determine if there is a relationship that can provide additional prognostic information. The investigator will only include patients with intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer, as low-risk cancer is unusual with spread to lymph nodes. The study will be a prospective observation study in which all consecutive elective patients in Umeå with confirmed intermediate and high risk type rectal cancer, which give their consent, are included and examined preoperatively. Thereafter, imaging and blood and tumor tissue samples are examined and evaluated.
Primary research questions:
- Can FDG-PET/MR provide improved accuracy in assessment of local tumor proliferation, lymph node metastasis and other important prognostic factors (MRF +, EMVI) in rectal cancer compared to currently used methods magnetic resonance imaging, (MRI), PET/CT or CT?
- Can FDG-PET/MR provide an improved accuracy in assessment of tumor regression following combined cytostatics and radiotherapy in rectal cancer compared to MRI or PET/CT?
- Can FDG-PET / MR in combination with blood and tumor tissue biomarkers provide additional prognostic information for intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer?
Secondary research questions:
- How does the accumulation of FDG change in rectal cancer tissue when examined after 60 minutes vs examination after 90 minutes?
Patients will be examined with a whole body FDG-PET CT, where the CT replaces the regular diagnostic CT examination. There is also a FDG-PET/MR of the pelvic region, where the MR part replaces the regular MRI examination. For patients with locally advanced disease undergoing combined radiation and chemotherapy, a further PET/CT and PET/MR are acquired at least 4 weeks after the treatment, but before surgery. In future, patients who only need shorter radiation therapy may undergo further PET/CT and PET/MR before surgery, if time between radiation and surgery is extended as clinical routine.
PET/CT and PET/MR are done immediately after each other with only one FDG injection of 4 Mbq/kg body weight. The examinations will be reviewed and judged according to clinical routine, where all reviewers have access to all image data. An additional reading will then be done by experienced GI-radiologist and nuclear medicine physician to assess the additional value for PET/MR. The histopathological finding in the examination of the surgical preparation will be used as a reference method.
In order to facilitate the assessment and correlation between individual lymph nodes in tissue analysis and imaging data, the operation specimen will, when this is possible, be examined with MRI postoperatively before the histopathological examination is performed.
The study does not involve any extra visits in addition to clinical routine at the Department of Radiology, but gives a small increase in radiation dose, as PET/MR is done instead of MRI only and in addition to PET/CT after CRT, which is not clinical routine. According to national guidelines, PET/CT is intended for advanced rectal cancer, but for those not included in this group, there will be an increased radiation dose of PET in PET/CT. This increase of ionizing radiation is small and corresponds to approximately 2 years of background radiation.
Radiological image data (PET/MR and PET/CT) is stored in the picture archiving and communicating system (PACS) as in clinical routine. Requests and reports are stored in the Department's Radiological Information System (RIS).
The examination is subject to the same confidentiality as any routine imaging examination at the department. Image data will not be destroyed. Data is exported to external software for post processing and statistical processing. All processing in addition to clinical routine takes place in unidentified data. Only those responsible and employees in the project have access to conversion lists.
The primary objective of this study is assessment of lymph node metastases. The best method today is MR which has a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 71%. With an estimated 20% prevalence of lymphoma metastases, an expected sensitivity of 90%, an expected specificity of 80% and 80% statistical strength, and 95% confidence interval, 307 glands are required for sensitivity and 691 glands for specificity. As the investigator expect to identify 8 glands per patient, it means that about 39 patients is needed for the sensitivity and about 87 patients for the specificity. The investigator round up the number of patients to 100 to compensate for any failure in the follow-up.
Written information is provided to the patient and patient leaves his signature. All signed consent is given to the x-ray department where they are filed at the research department. Individuals who can not or do not want to give consent are not included. This also applies to individuals with reduced decision-making skills.
The examination is subject to the same confidentiality as any routine x-ray examination at the clinic. Evaluation of the find takes place under safe forms within a limited circle and data is kept in safe storage. If external statistical consultation is required, patient data will be unidentified.
- Conditions
- Rectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastases
- Keywords
- PET/MR, PET/CT, FDG, Staging
- Medical subject headings
- Rectal Neoplasms, Lymphatic Metastasis
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Improved accuracy with FDG-PET/MR in assessment of local tumor proliferation, lymph node metastasis and other important prognostic factors (MRF +, EMVI) in rectal cancer compared to currently used methods MRI, PET/CT or CT?
Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of primary and restaging FDG-PET/MR in the identification of mesorectal lymph node metastases compared to primary and restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological examination as reference standard.
Measured: 8years
Improved accuracy in assessment of tumor regression following combined cytostatic and radiation treatment in rectal cancer with FDG-PET/MR compared to MRI or PET/CT?
Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of primary and restaging FDG-PET/MR in the characterization of extramural vascular invasion and tumour deposits compared to primary and restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological examination as reference standard.
Measured: 8years
Can FDG-PET / MR in combination with blood and tumor tissue biomarkers provide additional prognostic information for intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer?
Correlation between metabolic tumor regression grading with restaging FDG-PET/MR performed after neoadjuvant chemoradiation compared to restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological tumour regression grading according to TNM as reference standard.
Measured: 8years
Secondary outcomes (1)
How does the accumulation of FDG change in rectal cancer tissue when examined after 60 minutes vs examination after 90 minutes?
Correlation between Standard uptake value (SUV) mean, SUV max and total glycolytic content in rectal cancer at 60 and 90 minutes after FDG Injection in the primary tumour and lymph node metastases in the primary examinations and at restaging compared to blood and tumor tissue biomarkers and two and five-year clinical follow-up
Measured: 3years
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Feb 2019
- Study start1 Dec 2015
- Primary completion31 Dec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Dec 2023 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Rectal 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Region Västerbotten
- Sponsor type
- Other government
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Katrine Riklund, MD; PhD, Region Västerbotten
- Investigators
- Katrine Riklund, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå university, Sweden
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03846882
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2015-417-31
- Acronym
- RECTOPET
- Status last verified
- Feb 2019
- First submitted
- 6 Jul 2018
- Last updated
- 20 Feb 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Rutegard MK, Batsman M, Blomqvist L, Rutegard M, Axelsson J, Ljuslinder I, Rutegard J, Palmqvist R, Brannstrom F, Brynolfsson P, Riklund K. Rectal cancer: a methodological approach to matching PET/MRI to histopathology. Cancer Imaging. 2020 Oct 31;20(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s40644-020-00347-6.
PubMed 33129352Rutegard MK, Batsman M, Axelsson J, Brynolfsson P, Brannstrom F, Rutegard J, Ljuslinder I, Blomqvist L, Palmqvist R, Rutegard M, Riklund K. PET/MRI and PET/CT hybrid imaging of rectal cancer - description and initial observations from the RECTOPET (REctal Cancer trial on PET/MRI/CT) study. Cancer Imaging. 2019 Jul 23;19(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s40644-019-0237-1.
PubMed 31337428
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Feb 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Value of PET / MRI for the Assessment of Lymph Node Metastasis and Other Prognostic Factors in Patients With Rectal Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03846882
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- RECTOPET / 2015-417-31
- Conditions
- Rectal Cancer, Lymph Node Metastases
- Keywords
- PET/MR, PET/CT, FDG, Staging
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Region VästerbottenOther government
- Study start
- 1 Dec 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Feb 2019 (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 combination of FDG-PET/CT and MRI at staging of rectal cancer in diagnosis is currently very little studied. The investigator have a unique opportunity to study this. Hypothetically, with PET/MR as one hybrid imaging method, alternatively as an additional method, it could increase the accuracy of rectal cancer of moderate and high risk type, especially at primary N-staging, but also in assessing other important prognostic factors such as T-staging, peritoneal involvement, metastasis to lateral lymph nodes, EMVI and MRF involvement. The same reasoning applies to the assessment of tumor regression after CRT.
In the study, PET/MR is compared with PET/CT, diagnostic CT and MRI to evaluate the additional value of the hybrid imaging PET/MRI. The investigator also plan to evaluate how immunological, proliferative and prognostic biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue correlate with the radiological findings, and if the combination biomarker and radiology can provide additional prognostic information.
Detailed description
Today, there is a variety of treatment options in diagnosed rectal cancer. The standard treatment is surgery with removal of the tumour including surrounding fat and lymph nodes in a package. Prior to surgery, the patient may be given a shorter or longer radiation treatment, the latter in combination with cytostatics, depending on staging at the time of diagnosis. Cytostatic drugs can also be given post surgery. The choice of treatment for the individual patient is based on the assessment of the imaging, ie conventional X-ray, ultrasound, computed tomography, (CT), Magnet Resonance Tomography Imaging (MRI) and Positron Emission Tomography in combination with CT (PET/CT). An accurate staging assessment is crucial for adequate treatment of rectal cancer patients to avoid over treatment, which in itself causes unnecessary suffering, or under treatment with increased risk of relapse. With today's methods, tumor size, overgrowth of other organs and spread to other organs such as liver and lung can be reasonable assessed. On the other hand, there is great uncertainty when assessing spread to lymph nodes. Better safety is also needed for other prognostically important factors such as tumor involvement of the mesorectal fasciae (MRF), i.e. the rectum surrounding the tumor, and tumor growth in venous vessels outside the intramural invasion of the intestinal wall, EMVI.
Hybrid imaging with PET combined with magnetic resonance imaging (PET/MR) is a novel method and there are currently no published studies comparing the outcome of fluoro-deoxy glucose (FDG) -PET/MR with CT, MR, PET/CT at staging of rectal cancer, both primarily and after radiation and cytostatics treatment (CRT). In this study, the investigator plan to evaluate the additional value for PET/MR in rectal cancer. Only patients to be operated are included and microscopic examination of the preparation, histopathology, will be the reference method with which survey data from the imaging methods are compared. The investigator also want to evaluate the relationship between the radiological findings and biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue to determine if there is a relationship that can provide additional prognostic information. The investigator will only include patients with intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer, as low-risk cancer is unusual with spread to lymph nodes. The study will be a prospective observation study in which all consecutive elective patients in Umeå with confirmed intermediate and high risk type rectal cancer, which give their consent, are included and examined preoperatively. Thereafter, imaging and blood and tumor tissue samples are examined and evaluated.
Primary research questions:
- Can FDG-PET/MR provide improved accuracy in assessment of local tumor proliferation, lymph node metastasis and other important prognostic factors (MRF +, EMVI) in rectal cancer compared to currently used methods magnetic resonance imaging, (MRI), PET/CT or CT?
- Can FDG-PET/MR provide an improved accuracy in assessment of tumor regression following combined cytostatics and radiotherapy in rectal cancer compared to MRI or PET/CT?
- Can FDG-PET / MR in combination with blood and tumor tissue biomarkers provide additional prognostic information for intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer?
Secondary research questions:
- How does the accumulation of FDG change in rectal cancer tissue when examined after 60 minutes vs examination after 90 minutes?
Patients will be examined with a whole body FDG-PET CT, where the CT replaces the regular diagnostic CT examination. There is also a FDG-PET/MR of the pelvic region, where the MR part replaces the regular MRI examination. For patients with locally advanced disease undergoing combined radiation and chemotherapy, a further PET/CT and PET/MR are acquired at least 4 weeks after the treatment, but before surgery. In future, patients who only need shorter radiation therapy may undergo further PET/CT and PET/MR before surgery, if time between radiation and surgery is extended as clinical routine.
PET/CT and PET/MR are done immediately after each other with only one FDG injection of 4 Mbq/kg body weight. The examinations will be reviewed and judged according to clinical routine, where all reviewers have access to all image data. An additional reading will then be done by experienced GI-radiologist and nuclear medicine physician to assess the additional value for PET/MR. The histopathological finding in the examination of the surgical preparation will be used as a reference method.
In order to facilitate the assessment and correlation between individual lymph nodes in tissue analysis and imaging data, the operation specimen will, when this is possible, be examined with MRI postoperatively before the histopathological examination is performed.
The study does not involve any extra visits in addition to clinical routine at the Department of Radiology, but gives a small increase in radiation dose, as PET/MR is done instead of MRI only and in addition to PET/CT after CRT, which is not clinical routine. According to national guidelines, PET/CT is intended for advanced rectal cancer, but for those not included in this group, there will be an increased radiation dose of PET in PET/CT. This increase of ionizing radiation is small and corresponds to approximately 2 years of background radiation.
Radiological image data (PET/MR and PET/CT) is stored in the picture archiving and communicating system (PACS) as in clinical routine. Requests and reports are stored in the Department's Radiological Information System (RIS).
The examination is subject to the same confidentiality as any routine imaging examination at the department. Image data will not be destroyed. Data is exported to external software for post processing and statistical processing. All processing in addition to clinical routine takes place in unidentified data. Only those responsible and employees in the project have access to conversion lists.
The primary objective of this study is assessment of lymph node metastases. The best method today is MR which has a sensitivity of 77% and a specificity of 71%. With an estimated 20% prevalence of lymphoma metastases, an expected sensitivity of 90%, an expected specificity of 80% and 80% statistical strength, and 95% confidence interval, 307 glands are required for sensitivity and 691 glands for specificity. As the investigator expect to identify 8 glands per patient, it means that about 39 patients is needed for the sensitivity and about 87 patients for the specificity. The investigator round up the number of patients to 100 to compensate for any failure in the follow-up.
Written information is provided to the patient and patient leaves his signature. All signed consent is given to the x-ray department where they are filed at the research department. Individuals who can not or do not want to give consent are not included. This also applies to individuals with reduced decision-making skills.
The examination is subject to the same confidentiality as any routine x-ray examination at the clinic. Evaluation of the find takes place under safe forms within a limited circle and data is kept in safe storage. If external statistical consultation is required, patient data will be unidentified.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- With an estimated 20% prevalence of lymphoma metastases, an expected sensitivity of 90%, an expected specificity of 80% and 80% statistical strength, and 95% confidence interval, 307 glands are required for sensitivity and 691 glands for specificity. The investigator expect to identify 8 glands per patient, which means that about 39 patients for the sensitivity and about 87 patients for the specificity is needed. The investigator round up the number of patients to 100 to compensate for any failure in the follow-up.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- verified rectal cancer of intermediate or high risk type, scheduled for surgery (non-acute surgery)
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- kidney dysfunction
- any other contraindications for contrast agents or examination with MRi or FDG-PET/CT
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
Improved accuracy with FDG-PET/MR in assessment of local tumor proliferation, lymph node metastasis and other important prognostic factors (MRF +, EMVI) in rectal cancer compared to currently used methods MRI, PET/CT or CT?
Time frame: 8years
Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of primary and restaging FDG-PET/MR in the identification of mesorectal lymph node metastases compared to primary and restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological examination as reference standard.
Improved accuracy in assessment of tumor regression following combined cytostatic and radiation treatment in rectal cancer with FDG-PET/MR compared to MRI or PET/CT?
Time frame: 8years
Sensitivity, specificity and likelihood ratios of primary and restaging FDG-PET/MR in the characterization of extramural vascular invasion and tumour deposits compared to primary and restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological examination as reference standard.
Can FDG-PET / MR in combination with blood and tumor tissue biomarkers provide additional prognostic information for intermediate and high-risk rectal cancer?
Time frame: 8years
Correlation between metabolic tumor regression grading with restaging FDG-PET/MR performed after neoadjuvant chemoradiation compared to restaging FDG-PET/CT, MRI and CT alone with histopathological tumour regression grading according to TNM as reference standard.
1 secondary outcome
How does the accumulation of FDG change in rectal cancer tissue when examined after 60 minutes vs examination after 90 minutes?
Time frame: 3years
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Feb 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33129352Rutegard MK, Batsman M, Blomqvist L, Rutegard M, Axelsson J, Ljuslinder I, Rutegard J, Palmqvist R, Brannstrom F, Brynolfsson P, Riklund K. Rectal cancer: a methodological approach to matching PET/MRI to histopathology. Cancer Imaging. 2020 Oct 31;20(1):80. doi: 10.1186/s40644-020-00347-6.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 31337428Rutegard MK, Batsman M, Axelsson J, Brynolfsson P, Brannstrom F, Rutegard J, Ljuslinder I, Blomqvist L, Palmqvist R, Rutegard M, Riklund K. PET/MRI and PET/CT hybrid imaging of rectal cancer - description and initial observations from the RECTOPET (REctal Cancer trial on PET/MRI/CT) study. Cancer Imaging. 2019 Jul 23;19(1):52. doi: 10.1186/s40644-019-0237-1.
Related trials for Rectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingObservational study
Pre- and On-treatment Multi-omics Profiling of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Rectal Neoplasms
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
RecruitingPhase 2
Tislelizumab in People With Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer
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.
Katrine Riklund, MD, PhD principal investigator
Department of Radiation Sciences, Diagnostic Radiology, Umeå university, Sweden
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 Rectal Cancer and Lymph Node Metastases, run by Region Västerbotten at 1 site in Sweden.
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 1 inclusion and 2 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 20 Feb 2019. 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 Sweden. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Miriam Rutegård (0046907850000, katrine.riklund@umu.se), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Improved accuracy with FDG-PET/MR in assessment of local tumor proliferation, lymph node metastasis and other important prognostic factors (MRF +, EMVI) in rectal cancer compared to currently used methods MRI, PET/CT or CT? (time frame: 8years). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT03846882, which also lists 2 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 20 Feb 2019.