Breast CancerCEMMAGNCT06049446
Combining CEM and Magnetic Seed Localization of Non-Palpable Breast Tumors
An observational study of Breast Cancer, run by Zuyderland Medisch Centrum at 1 site in Netherlands.
Trial summary
Rationale: Breast cancer patients are increasingly treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for various reasons. These women receive chemotherapy before any surgery is performed. Many of these tumors need preoperative seed localization to help guide the surgeons to the site of the tumor within the breast. 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?
- Pintuition
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteNetherlands
- Study dates
- 8 Sep 2023to 10 Jun 2024
- How long will I take part?
- 1 Day
- 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
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: For this purpose, women meeting the inclusion criteria (see paragraph 4.2) will be asked to participate in this study. If they consent, the regular localization using a I-125 marker will be replaced by the magnetic seed, but the remainder of the procedure of implantation is identical (image guided placement using local anesthesia). Normally, a conventional (full-field digital) mammogram is acquired to establish the (correct) position of the marker with respect to the lesion of interest. For this study, we will select the 'CEM' mode instead of 'FFDM' mode on the mammography unit. This will result in having a standard CEM examination. Since the images are intended to check for artifacts caused by the seed, we decided not to administrate iodinated contrast agent to reduce patient's burden (as this would require catheter placement and contrast administration, potentially resulting in complications such as infection, hematoma, and hypersensitivity reactions to the contrast used). A low-ener
Who may be able to join
- Included are non-pregnant women (>18 years of age),
- Recently diagnosed with non-palpable invasive breast cancer or DCIS, requiring primary surgical treatment.
- Only women able to provide written informed consent will be considered for this study.
Who cannot join
- Excluded are women not meeting the inclusion criteria.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Combining Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Radio-active Free Magnetic Seed Localization of Non-palpable Breast Tumors: A Feasibility Study
Rationale: Breast cancer patients are increasingly treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for various reasons. These women receive chemotherapy before any surgery is performed. Many of these tumors need preoperative seed localization to help guide the surgeons to the site of the tumor within the breast. The interest is shifting towards to use of non-radioactive seeds, such as the magnetic seeds used in this study. A drawback of these seeds is the fact that they cause large susceptibility artifacts on (magnetic!) MRI of the breast. Breast MRI is the most accurate modality to monitor response to therapy of these women. CEM, an emerging breast imaging technique, has shown to achieve comparable results with regard to response monitoring but uses no magnetic fields. Hence, CEM might be an attractive alternative response monitoring tool in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and having a magnetic seed a surgical marker. To this point, however, no study in humans has confirmed that this is indeed the case.
Objective: To test whether the use of magnetic localization seeds causes image artifacts on CEM.
Read more
Study design: Observational feasibility study.
Study population: Women (>18 years) able to provide written informed consent and recently diagnosed with (non-palpable) breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), who are primarily treated with surgery.
Intervention (if applicable): Image-guided placement of a magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition) prior to surgery, including control imaging to confirm the correct location of the seed relative to the breast abnormality. In usual patient care this is performed with full-field digital mammography (FFDM), but in this study this control image will be performed with the system in 'contrast-enhanced mammography' or CEM mode, but without using intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agent because the purpose is not repetition of diagnostic imaging, but to rule out any artifacts caused by the seed on CEM. The investigators estimate to include twenty patients to confidently test the hypothesis that magnetic seeds do not cause disturbing artifacts on CEM examinations.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary study aim will be to test whether the magnetic seeds caused any disturbing artifacts on CEM images. As secondary study, the investigators will document technical success rate of seed deployment and retrieval during surgery, including the assessment of the surgical margins (positive or negative).
Read the detailed description
Rationale: Breast cancer patients are increasingly treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for various reasons. These women receive chemotherapy before any surgery is performed. Many of these tumors need preoperative seed localization to help guide the surgeons to the site of the tumor within the breast. In many hospitals, a radioactive I-125 seed is used for this purpose, which has several disadvantages, such as a slight increase in radiation dose and extensive administrative regulations to monitor the location of the seed at any time (required by law). This administrative work is time consuming, elaborate and prone to errors. Therefore, interest is shifting towards to use of non-radioactive seeds, such as the magnetic seeds used in this study. A drawback of these seeds is the fact that they cause large susceptibility artifacts on (magnetic!) MRI of the breast. Breast MRI is the most accurate modality to monitor response to therapy of these women. CEM, an emerging breast imaging technique, has shown to achieve comparable results with regard to response monitoring but uses no magnetic fields. Hence, CEM might be an attractive alternative response monitoring tool in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and having a magnetic seed a surgical marker. To this point, however, no study in humans has confirmed that this is indeed the case.
Objective: To test whether the use of magnetic localization seeds causes image artifacts on CEM.
Study design: Observational feasibility study. Study population: Women (>18 years) able to provide written informed consent and recently diagnosed with (non-palpable) breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), who are primarily treated with surgery.
Intervention (if applicable): Image-guided placement of a magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition) prior to surgery, including control imaging to confirm the correct location of the seed relative to the breast abnormality. In usual patient care this is performed with full-field digital mammography (FFDM), but in this study this control image will be performed with the system in 'contrast-enhanced mammography' or CEM mode, but without using intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agent because the purpose is not repetition of diagnostic imaging, but to rule out any artifacts caused by the seed on CEM. The investigators estimate to include twenty patients to confidently test the hypothesis that magnetic seeds do not cause disturbing artifacts on CEM examinations.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary study aim will be to test whether the magnetic seeds caused any disturbing artifacts on CEM images. For this purpose, two radiologists will score the images for the presence of any artifacts and if present, if these are to such an extent that they would hamper diagnostic evaluation of the images. The radiologists will assess the images independently first, and consensus opinion is formed should any discrepancies occur in their judgement. As secondary study, the investigators will document technical success rate of seed deployment and retrieval during surgery, including the assessment of the surgical margins (positive or negative).
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit, and group relatedness: The burden and risk for participating subjects are very small. In regular care, a radioactive I-125 seed is placed in the breasts of these women, checking the position with (conventional) FFDM. For this purpose, the iodine seed is replaced with a (radioactive-free) magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition). The latter did not show any relevant imaging artifacts prior to this study in imaging phantoms (i.e., chicken breasts containing magnetic seeds). Therefore, the investigators feel confident that these seeds will not show artifacts on clinical CEM image, but this needs to be confirmed before additional studies regarding the clinical application of CEM and magnetic seeds combined can be safely performed. The only additional disadvantage for participants is the slight increased radiation dose of the (extra) high-energy image CEM image, which is an increased radiation dose to the breasts of 50-80%. However, these women are all diagnosed with breast cancer requiring adjuvant radiotherapy, which uses radiation doses much, much higher than a single mammographic exposure.
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Being tested
- Pintuition
- Keywords
- Breast neoplasms, Mammography
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
PintuitionDevice
Magnetic seed localization
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Patients receiving seed localization | Patients receiving seed localization Receives: Device: Pintuition |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Assessment of image artifacts
Main study endpoint will be the assessment of the occurrence of image artifacts, which will be scored by blinded radiologists in the following way: if there are any artifacts present in the image (yes/no) and caused by the magnetic seed
Measured: 1 day
Influence of image artifacts
If primary outcome measure #1 is answered with yes: are the artifacts influencing the overall image quality (yes/no)?
Measured: 1 day
Secondary outcomes (3)
Technical success rate of seed deployment
The investigators will evaluate how often the seed deployment was considered succesful (in %)
Measured: 1 month
Technical success rate of see retrieval during surgery
The investigators aim to evaluate how often the seed could not be retrieved during surgery of the breast (in %)
Measured: 1 month
Surgical outcome
The investigators aim to study how often the surgical margins were not radical, i.e. still contained invasive breast cancer or DCIS (in %)
Measured: 1 month
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 Sep 2023
- Study start8 Sep 2023
- Primary completion10 Jun 2024
- Study completion10 Jun 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Target duration
- 1 Day
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Zuyderland Medisch Centrum
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06049446
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- CEMMAG
- Acronym
- CEMMAG
- Status last verified
- Jun 2024
- First submitted
- 8 Sep 2023
- Last updated
- 14 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No: IPD is not expected for this study nor its outcomes.
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Combining Contrast-Enhanced Mammography and Radio-active Free Magnetic Seed Localization of Non-palpable Breast Tumors: A Feasibility Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06049446
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- CEMMAG / CEMMAG
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Keywords
- Breast neoplasms, Mammography
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Zuyderland Medisch CentrumUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 8 Sep 2023 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 10 Jun 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Jun 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 Sep 2023 (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.
Rationale: Breast cancer patients are increasingly treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for various reasons. These women receive chemotherapy before any surgery is performed. Many of these tumors need preoperative seed localization to help guide the surgeons to the site of the tumor within the breast. The interest is shifting towards to use of non-radioactive seeds, such as the magnetic seeds used in this study. A drawback of these seeds is the fact that they cause large susceptibility artifacts on (magnetic!) MRI of the breast. Breast MRI is the most accurate modality to monitor response to therapy of these women. CEM, an emerging breast imaging technique, has shown to achieve comparable results with regard to response monitoring but uses no magnetic fields. Hence, CEM might be an attractive alternative response monitoring tool in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and having a magnetic seed a surgical marker. To this point, however, no study in humans has confirmed that this is indeed the case.
Objective: To test whether the use of magnetic localization seeds causes image artifacts on CEM.
Study design: Observational feasibility study.
Study population: Women (>18 years) able to provide written informed consent and recently diagnosed with (non-palpable) breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), who are primarily treated with surgery.
Intervention (if applicable): Image-guided placement of a magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition) prior to surgery, including control imaging to confirm the correct location of the seed relative to the breast abnormality. In usual patient care this is performed with full-field digital mammography (FFDM), but in this study this control image will be performed with the system in 'contrast-enhanced mammography' or CEM mode, but without using intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agent because the purpose is not repetition of diagnostic imaging, but to rule out any artifacts caused by the seed on CEM. The investigators estimate to include twenty patients to confidently test the hypothesis that magnetic seeds do not cause disturbing artifacts on CEM examinations.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary study aim will be to test whether the magnetic seeds caused any disturbing artifacts on CEM images. As secondary study, the investigators will document technical success rate of seed deployment and retrieval during surgery, including the assessment of the surgical margins (positive or negative).
Detailed description
Rationale: Breast cancer patients are increasingly treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy for various reasons. These women receive chemotherapy before any surgery is performed. Many of these tumors need preoperative seed localization to help guide the surgeons to the site of the tumor within the breast. In many hospitals, a radioactive I-125 seed is used for this purpose, which has several disadvantages, such as a slight increase in radiation dose and extensive administrative regulations to monitor the location of the seed at any time (required by law). This administrative work is time consuming, elaborate and prone to errors. Therefore, interest is shifting towards to use of non-radioactive seeds, such as the magnetic seeds used in this study. A drawback of these seeds is the fact that they cause large susceptibility artifacts on (magnetic!) MRI of the breast. Breast MRI is the most accurate modality to monitor response to therapy of these women. CEM, an emerging breast imaging technique, has shown to achieve comparable results with regard to response monitoring but uses no magnetic fields. Hence, CEM might be an attractive alternative response monitoring tool in patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and having a magnetic seed a surgical marker. To this point, however, no study in humans has confirmed that this is indeed the case.
Objective: To test whether the use of magnetic localization seeds causes image artifacts on CEM.
Study design: Observational feasibility study. Study population: Women (>18 years) able to provide written informed consent and recently diagnosed with (non-palpable) breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), who are primarily treated with surgery.
Intervention (if applicable): Image-guided placement of a magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition) prior to surgery, including control imaging to confirm the correct location of the seed relative to the breast abnormality. In usual patient care this is performed with full-field digital mammography (FFDM), but in this study this control image will be performed with the system in 'contrast-enhanced mammography' or CEM mode, but without using intravenous administration of iodinated contrast agent because the purpose is not repetition of diagnostic imaging, but to rule out any artifacts caused by the seed on CEM. The investigators estimate to include twenty patients to confidently test the hypothesis that magnetic seeds do not cause disturbing artifacts on CEM examinations.
Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary study aim will be to test whether the magnetic seeds caused any disturbing artifacts on CEM images. For this purpose, two radiologists will score the images for the presence of any artifacts and if present, if these are to such an extent that they would hamper diagnostic evaluation of the images. The radiologists will assess the images independently first, and consensus opinion is formed should any discrepancies occur in their judgement. As secondary study, the investigators will document technical success rate of seed deployment and retrieval during surgery, including the assessment of the surgical margins (positive or negative).
Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit, and group relatedness: The burden and risk for participating subjects are very small. In regular care, a radioactive I-125 seed is placed in the breasts of these women, checking the position with (conventional) FFDM. For this purpose, the iodine seed is replaced with a (radioactive-free) magnetic seed (Sirius Pintuition). The latter did not show any relevant imaging artifacts prior to this study in imaging phantoms (i.e., chicken breasts containing magnetic seeds). Therefore, the investigators feel confident that these seeds will not show artifacts on clinical CEM image, but this needs to be confirmed before additional studies regarding the clinical application of CEM and magnetic seeds combined can be safely performed. The only additional disadvantage for participants is the slight increased radiation dose of the (extra) high-energy image CEM image, which is an increased radiation dose to the breasts of 50-80%. However, these women are all diagnosed with breast cancer requiring adjuvant radiotherapy, which uses radiation doses much, much higher than a single mammographic exposure.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Target follow-up
- 1 Day
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Patients receiving seed localization | – | Device: PintuitionPatients receiving seed localization |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- For this purpose, women meeting the inclusion criteria (see paragraph 4.2) will be asked to participate in this study. If they consent, the regular localization using a I-125 marker will be replaced by the magnetic seed, but the remainder of the procedure of implantation is identical (image guided placement using local anesthesia). Normally, a conventional (full-field digital) mammogram is acquired to establish the (correct) position of the marker with respect to the lesion of interest. For this study, we will select the 'CEM' mode instead of 'FFDM' mode on the mammography unit. This will result in having a standard CEM examination. Since the images are intended to check for artifacts caused by the seed, we decided not to administrate iodinated contrast agent to reduce patient's burden (as this would require catheter placement and contrast administration, potentially resulting in complications such as infection, hematoma, and hypersensitivity reactions to the contrast used). A low-ener
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Included are non-pregnant women (>18 years of age),
- Recently diagnosed with non-palpable invasive breast cancer or DCIS, requiring primary surgical treatment.
- Only women able to provide written informed consent will be considered for this study.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Excluded are women not meeting the inclusion criteria.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| PintuitionMagnetic seed localization | Device | Patients receiving seed localization |
Primary outcome
Assessment of image artifacts
Time frame: 1 day
Main study endpoint will be the assessment of the occurrence of image artifacts, which will be scored by blinded radiologists in the following way: if there are any artifacts present in the image (yes/no) and caused by the magnetic seed
Influence of image artifacts
Time frame: 1 day
If primary outcome measure #1 is answered with yes: are the artifacts influencing the overall image quality (yes/no)?
3 secondary outcomes
Technical success rate of seed deployment
Time frame: 1 month
Technical success rate of see retrieval during surgery
Time frame: 1 month
Surgical outcome
Time frame: 1 month
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 14 Jun 2024.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. IPD is not expected for this study nor its outcomes.
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.
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 Breast Cancer, run by Zuyderland Medisch Centrum at 1 site in Netherlands.
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 1 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 14 Jun 2024. 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 Netherlands. 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?
Assessment of image artifacts (time frame: 1 day). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. 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 14 Jun 2024.