Pancreatic NeoplasmsNCT06563232
22G-Adapt Needle Biopsy Versus Fine-needle Aspiration in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Sampling of Solid Lesions
A study testing FNA group and Adapt FNB group in people with Pancreatic Neoplasms and Mediastinal Neoplasms, run by Huazhong University of Science and Technology at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
The investigators conduct a multicenter randomized controlled study to evaluate the diagnostic value and safety of 22G Adapt Aspiration puncture needle for histopathology of solid lesions. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 85 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Pancreatic Neoplasms, Mediastinal Neoplasms, Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm
- What is being tested?
- FNA group and Adapt FNB group
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 656 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 1 Sep 2024to 1 Feb 2026
- Phase
- Interventional
- 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 to 85 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Over 18 years old and under 85 years old;
- Imaging examinations (MRI, CT, B-ultrasound) reveal the presence of solid masses (with a diameter > 1 cm) within the regions accessible by endoscopic ultrasound in the pancreas, peripancreatic area, liver, adrenal gland, kidney, mediastinum, lung, and gastrointestinal submucosa. Biopsy is necessary for the diagnosis of these lesions;
- Must be able to receive examinations in the research center;
- Must be able to sign the informed consent.
Who cannot join
- Hemoglobin ≤8.0 g/dL;
- Pregnant women;
- Coagulation disorders (PLT <50,000/mm3,INR > 1.5);
- Took anticoagulants such as aspirin, warfarin in the latest week;
- Acute pancreatitis in the past two weeks;
- inability to safely perform EUS-TA (eg, cardiorespiratory dysfunction, mental diseases, or drug addiction); refusal or inability to provide an informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
China1 site
Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, HUST
Wuhan, Hubei, 430030
Bin Cheng, Professor, 86-027-8366-3333, b.cheng@tjh.tjmu.edu.cn
Qingxiong Ma, +8613588580316, u202110372@hust.edu.cn
About this study
Official title: 22G-Adapt Needle Biopsy Versus Fine-needle Aspiration in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Sampling of Solid Lesions: a Randomized Controlled Study
The investigators conduct a multicenter randomized controlled study to evaluate the diagnostic value and safety of 22G Adapt Aspiration puncture needle for histopathology of solid lesions.
Read the detailed description
The study subjects are divided into two groups: the EUS-FNA(22G EchoTip Ultra needles) Group and EUS-FNB group(22 Adapt Aspiration).Take the malignant occupying lesion diagnosis accuracy as the research major indicator to compare the EUS-FNB group and EUS-FNA group as optimal efficiency test. Take the class I error a=0.05, class II error β=0.15, power=0.85. Suppose the malignancy diagnosis accuracy is 82%, while that of FNB is 91%. The two trial groups be randomly allocated in 1:1, suppose the malignancy cases take 85% of the whole case, and considering the shedding factors , extra 20% cases should be included. So the estimated cases numbers is 328 cases for EUS-FNB group and 328 cases for EUS-FNA group, totally 656 cases in this trial.
Done by professional statistical people with randomized block grouping method and SAS 9.4 statistical software to generate randomized serial number(001-656)for the two groups in 1:1 manner. The serial numbers are the randomized grouping numbers for the trial patients, block capacity is 116, totally 41 randomized block. The randomized grouping will be generated in duplicate copies and sealed. One copy send to trial centers for patient allocating, and the another copy be saved by the trial applicant unit. Every trail centers will be responsible for the screening of qualified patients, rank them in visit time to get the randomized grouping number so as to determine them goes to the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB.The research people and patients in all trial centers should not know the the randomized grouping number and relevant groups. The group name will be sealed under scratch card. Every trial patients will get a unique randomized number, and it will not change through out the whole trial.
Use the inclusion and exclusion criteria to observe the patients and do relative inspections, and confirm if the patients qualified or not to the trial. Record the result of last time test before the treatment. Although it is better to get the informed consent before doing all kinds of observation and tests, if for some reason, the medical imaging examination has completed, as long as the imaging examination was done within 3 weeks before the needle biopsy, it can still be collect as baseline data (imaging examination can be done at other hospitals, but the trial center should issue a new evaluation report 1 week before the patient join the trial group); other lab test items done at 2 weeks before the needle biopsy can still be collect as baseline data for pre-research use, but these tests should be done at the trail center hospital so as to guarantee the data trace ability.
The investigators will do the needle passes for 3 times for all of them:the 1 needle passes with Slow-Pull and the 2-3 needle passes with wide suction. If no core tissues obtained or the operator/onsite pathologist determine insufficient specimen after the operations above, then remedy procedures will be done, the operator use proper puncture method to continue the remedy biopsy. After the first round of needle biopsy, if the trial patient cannot be diagnosed, by getting the agreement of the patient, the patient will be cross-over to another trial group and do needle biopsy again on the same lesion 1 week later with the method mentioned above. Without knowing the needle biopsy type, the cytologist and pathologist evaluate the specimen quality and make diagnosis. Every specimen will be independently evaluated and diagnosed by 2 experts. If the 2 experts have different judgments, then these two experts discuss together and make the final diagnose discussion. If the same sample has 2 or more cytology smear slides, than take the highest score slide as the result. Follow up (outpatient follow up or telephone follow up) the patients at 1 week, 12 weeks and 36 weeks after the needle biopsy and collect the patients clinical data and confirm their final diagnosis.
During the trial, if severe adverse event occurs, the trialed center must take immediate actions necessary to guarantee the trialed patients' safety. Once severe adverse event occurs, the researchers should inform the trial applicant and the trail center's ethics committee within 24 hours after the researchers gets to know the adverse event. And the researchers should also fax the report to State Food and Drug Administration of China and the local provincial food and drug administration. After receiving the report, the applicant should inform other clinical trial centers within 24 hours. All the severe adverse events should be filed at group leader medical center and other trial centers.
CRF(Case Report Form ) will be filled by the researchers, every involved patient must have the CRF(Case Report Form ) filled. This will be audited by clinical monitor and handed over to data administrator to input and manage data, the first copy will be kept by the applicant, the second copy will go to the trial center, and the third copy will be kept by the trail researchers.The data input and management will be taken care by specially assigned person. In order to guarantee the data accuracy, data input will be done twice by two independent data administrators, by computerized and manual verifying, hand over the data to statistical experts to do blind check and statistic analyzing.For the questions and doubts within the case report form, the data administrator make DRQ and via the clinical monitor asking the researchers. The researchers will answer and feed back as soon as possible. According to the researchers answer, data administrator will do the data modifying, confirming or inputting, and when necessary send out DRQ again.After blind audition and confirming that the established data base is correct, major researchers, applicant and the statistic analyzing people lock the data. The locked data will not be changed, and the data base will be handed over to statistical analyzer to do the statistic analyze according to the statistic analyzing plan. Problems found after data locking can be modified during the statistic analyzing procedure.This will be done by specialized statistic analyzing people according to the predetermined statistic analyzing plan. The statistic analyze will be carried out according to intention principle confirmed full analysis set and per-protocol set principle. After completing the statistic analyzing, the statistic analyzer issue the statistic analysis report and send this to major researchers to write the study report.
Statistic analyzing plan:⑴ General principle:① all the statistic tests are use the two-tailed-test method, P<0.05 will be thought as the tested difference is statistical significance. ② the quantitative indicator description will calculate the Mean and Standard deviation. The classification indicator description will describe the cases and percentage of all types of cases. ⑵ Statistic analyzing method:① for the measurement data, compare it with the baseline value at selection period, use paired t-test or symbol rank sum test to compare with the before-after-difference within the group.② for the counting data, use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method to compare the groups. ⑶ Shedding analysis:Comparison of groups'total shedding rates and the shedding rates caused by adverse events will use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method. ⑷ The baseline value's equilibrium analysis: Use group t test or x2 test to compare the demography info and vital signs, disease history, and basic treatment and other indicators of baseline value, so as to measure the balance of the groups. The baseline evaluation will be done on FAS(full analysis set) and PPs(per-protocol set). ⑸ Effectiveness analysis:The major indicator of effectiveness analysis is the diagnostic accuracy on malignant disease, and the indicators of second effectiveness include the percentage of Grade A specimen and complications rate etc. while the two groups rate and the Youden index comparison will use approximate normal Z test or use central effect x2 test.(6) Safety analysis:Use x2 test or Fisher's exact test to compare the adverse event/adverse reaction (include biopsy complications) rates between the groups. And use table to describe the adverse events during this trial project; the lab test results before and after the trial, the normal/abnormal changing condition and the relationship with this trial research when abnormal changes happened.
- Conditions
- Pancreatic Neoplasms, Mediastinal Neoplasms, Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm
- Being tested
- FNA group, Adapt FNB group
- Keywords
- endoscopic ultrasound, fine-needle aspiration, fine-needle biopsy
- Medical subject headings
- Pancreatic Neoplasms, Mediastinal Neoplasms, Abdominal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
FNA groupDevice
Fine-needle-aspiration (22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22)
Adapt FNB groupDevice
Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Adapt Aspiration)
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| FNA group | Experimental | FNA needles adopted to acquire lesion tissues Receives: Device: FNA group |
| Adapt FNB group | Experimental | Adapt FNB needles adopted to acquire lesion tissues Receives: Device: Adapt FNB group |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The histological diagnostic yields
The investigators' primary outcome measure is to compare the histological diagnostic yields of 22G Adapt Aspiration FNB and FNA puncture needle (22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22) to the solid pancreatic or nonpancreatic lesions compared to conventional FNA puncture needle(22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22) for pancreatic and non-pancreatic solid lesions.
Measured: up to 15 months
Secondary outcomes (4)
the histological acquisition yields
Comparing the histological acquisition yields of 22G Adapt Aspiration (EUS-FNB) and Echo-3-22 (EUS-FNA) for solid space-occupying lesions.
Measured: up to 15 months
the diagnostic yields of the first pass and the number of subsequent passes
Comparing the diagnostic yields of the first puncture needle and subsequent puncture needles of 22G Adapt Aspiration (EUS-FNB) and Echo-3-22 (EUS-FNA) for solid space-occupying lesions(EUS-FNA) for the number of first and subsequent puncture needles for solid space occupying lesions.
Measured: up to 15 months
the cytological diagnosis yields
Comparing the cytological diagnostic yields of 22G Adapt Aspiration (EUS-FNB) and Echo-3-22 (EUS-FNA) for solid space-occupying lesions.
Measured: up to 15 months
the complication yields
Comparing the complication rates during and after puncture between 22G Adapt Aspiration (EUS-FNB) and Echo-3-22.
Measured: up to 15 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted20 Aug 2024
- Study start1 Sep 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Feb 2026 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (7)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pancreatic NeoplasmsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- 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
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 656 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Huazhong University of Science and Technology
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Fudan University, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Bin Cheng, Huazhong University of Science and Technology
- Investigators
- Bin Cheng, Principal investigator, Tongji Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06563232
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- FNA vs Adapt FNB
- Status last verified
- Aug 2024
- First submitted
- 17 Aug 2024
- Last updated
- 20 Aug 2024
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Gkolfakis P, Crino SF, Tziatzios G, Ramai D, Papaefthymiou A, Papanikolaou IS, Triantafyllou K, Arvanitakis M, Lisotti A, Fusaroli P, Mangiavillano B, Carrara S, Repici A, Hassan C, Facciorusso A. Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jun;95(6):1067-1077.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.01.019. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
PubMed 35124072van Riet PA, Erler NS, Bruno MJ, Cahen DL. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):411-423. doi: 10.1055/a-1206-5552. Epub 2020 Aug 6.
PubMed 32583392Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H, Dou L, Wang J, Li Y, Yang X, Jiang T, Xu G, Wang G. Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy vs Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Abdominal Masses: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;16(8):1314-1321. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.07.010. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
PubMed 28733257Pouw RE, Barret M, Biermann K, Bisschops R, Czako L, Gecse KB, de Hertogh G, Hucl T, Iacucci M, Jansen M, Rutter M, Savarino E, Spaander MCW, Schmidt PT, Vieth M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, van Hooft JE. Endoscopic tissue sampling - Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1174-1188. doi: 10.1055/a-1611-5091. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
PubMed 34535035Itonaga M, Yasukawa S, Fukutake N, Ogura T, Asada M, Shimokawa T, Inatomi O, Nakai Y, Shiomi H, Nebiki H, Suzuki A, Kitagawa K, Asai S, Shimatani M, Sanuki T, Kurita A, Takenaka M, Yoshida M, Hoki N, Yasuda H, Maruyama H, Matsumoto H, Yanagisawa A, Kitano M. Comparison of 22-gauge standard and Franseen needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jul;96(1):57-66.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.02.005. Epub 2022 Feb 11.
PubMed 35151711Ashat M, Klair JS, Rooney SL, Vishal SJ, Jensen C, Sahar N, Murali AR, El-Abiad R, Gerke H. Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):140-150.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.057. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
PubMed 32526235Kurita A, Yasukawa S, Zen Y, Yoshimura K, Ogura T, Ozawa E, Okabe Y, Asada M, Nebiki H, Shigekawa M, Ikeura T, Eguchi T, Maruyama H, Ueki T, Itonaga M, Hashimoto S, Shiomi H, Minami R, Hoki N, Takenaka M, Itokawa Y, Uza N, Hashigo S, Yasuda H, Takada R, Kamada H, Kawamoto H, Kawakami H, Moriyama I, Fujita K, Matsumoto H, Hanada K, Takemura T, Yazumi S. Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Feb;91(2):373-381.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.10.012. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
PubMed 31654634
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 20 Aug 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- 22G-Adapt Needle Biopsy Versus Fine-needle Aspiration in Endoscopic Ultrasound-guided Sampling of Solid Lesions: a Randomized Controlled Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06563232
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- FNA vs Adapt FNB
- Conditions
- Pancreatic Neoplasms, Mediastinal Neoplasms, Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm
- Keywords
- endoscopic ultrasound, fine-needle aspiration, fine-needle biopsy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 656 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Huazhong University of Science and TechnologyUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Peking Union Medical College Hospital, Fudan University, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Chongqing University Cancer Hospital, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University
- Study start
- 1 Sep 2024 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Feb 2026 (estimated)
- First posted
- 20 Aug 2024 (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 conduct a multicenter randomized controlled study to evaluate the diagnostic value and safety of 22G Adapt Aspiration puncture needle for histopathology of solid lesions.
Detailed description
The study subjects are divided into two groups: the EUS-FNA(22G EchoTip Ultra needles) Group and EUS-FNB group(22 Adapt Aspiration).Take the malignant occupying lesion diagnosis accuracy as the research major indicator to compare the EUS-FNB group and EUS-FNA group as optimal efficiency test. Take the class I error a=0.05, class II error β=0.15, power=0.85. Suppose the malignancy diagnosis accuracy is 82%, while that of FNB is 91%. The two trial groups be randomly allocated in 1:1, suppose the malignancy cases take 85% of the whole case, and considering the shedding factors , extra 20% cases should be included. So the estimated cases numbers is 328 cases for EUS-FNB group and 328 cases for EUS-FNA group, totally 656 cases in this trial.
Done by professional statistical people with randomized block grouping method and SAS 9.4 statistical software to generate randomized serial number(001-656)for the two groups in 1:1 manner. The serial numbers are the randomized grouping numbers for the trial patients, block capacity is 116, totally 41 randomized block. The randomized grouping will be generated in duplicate copies and sealed. One copy send to trial centers for patient allocating, and the another copy be saved by the trial applicant unit. Every trail centers will be responsible for the screening of qualified patients, rank them in visit time to get the randomized grouping number so as to determine them goes to the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB.The research people and patients in all trial centers should not know the the randomized grouping number and relevant groups. The group name will be sealed under scratch card. Every trial patients will get a unique randomized number, and it will not change through out the whole trial.
Use the inclusion and exclusion criteria to observe the patients and do relative inspections, and confirm if the patients qualified or not to the trial. Record the result of last time test before the treatment. Although it is better to get the informed consent before doing all kinds of observation and tests, if for some reason, the medical imaging examination has completed, as long as the imaging examination was done within 3 weeks before the needle biopsy, it can still be collect as baseline data (imaging examination can be done at other hospitals, but the trial center should issue a new evaluation report 1 week before the patient join the trial group); other lab test items done at 2 weeks before the needle biopsy can still be collect as baseline data for pre-research use, but these tests should be done at the trail center hospital so as to guarantee the data trace ability.
The investigators will do the needle passes for 3 times for all of them:the 1 needle passes with Slow-Pull and the 2-3 needle passes with wide suction. If no core tissues obtained or the operator/onsite pathologist determine insufficient specimen after the operations above, then remedy procedures will be done, the operator use proper puncture method to continue the remedy biopsy. After the first round of needle biopsy, if the trial patient cannot be diagnosed, by getting the agreement of the patient, the patient will be cross-over to another trial group and do needle biopsy again on the same lesion 1 week later with the method mentioned above. Without knowing the needle biopsy type, the cytologist and pathologist evaluate the specimen quality and make diagnosis. Every specimen will be independently evaluated and diagnosed by 2 experts. If the 2 experts have different judgments, then these two experts discuss together and make the final diagnose discussion. If the same sample has 2 or more cytology smear slides, than take the highest score slide as the result. Follow up (outpatient follow up or telephone follow up) the patients at 1 week, 12 weeks and 36 weeks after the needle biopsy and collect the patients clinical data and confirm their final diagnosis.
During the trial, if severe adverse event occurs, the trialed center must take immediate actions necessary to guarantee the trialed patients' safety. Once severe adverse event occurs, the researchers should inform the trial applicant and the trail center's ethics committee within 24 hours after the researchers gets to know the adverse event. And the researchers should also fax the report to State Food and Drug Administration of China and the local provincial food and drug administration. After receiving the report, the applicant should inform other clinical trial centers within 24 hours. All the severe adverse events should be filed at group leader medical center and other trial centers.
CRF(Case Report Form ) will be filled by the researchers, every involved patient must have the CRF(Case Report Form ) filled. This will be audited by clinical monitor and handed over to data administrator to input and manage data, the first copy will be kept by the applicant, the second copy will go to the trial center, and the third copy will be kept by the trail researchers.The data input and management will be taken care by specially assigned person. In order to guarantee the data accuracy, data input will be done twice by two independent data administrators, by computerized and manual verifying, hand over the data to statistical experts to do blind check and statistic analyzing.For the questions and doubts within the case report form, the data administrator make DRQ and via the clinical monitor asking the researchers. The researchers will answer and feed back as soon as possible. According to the researchers answer, data administrator will do the data modifying, confirming or inputting, and when necessary send out DRQ again.After blind audition and confirming that the established data base is correct, major researchers, applicant and the statistic analyzing people lock the data. The locked data will not be changed, and the data base will be handed over to statistical analyzer to do the statistic analyze according to the statistic analyzing plan. Problems found after data locking can be modified during the statistic analyzing procedure.This will be done by specialized statistic analyzing people according to the predetermined statistic analyzing plan. The statistic analyze will be carried out according to intention principle confirmed full analysis set and per-protocol set principle. After completing the statistic analyzing, the statistic analyzer issue the statistic analysis report and send this to major researchers to write the study report.
Statistic analyzing plan:⑴ General principle:① all the statistic tests are use the two-tailed-test method, P<0.05 will be thought as the tested difference is statistical significance. ② the quantitative indicator description will calculate the Mean and Standard deviation. The classification indicator description will describe the cases and percentage of all types of cases. ⑵ Statistic analyzing method:① for the measurement data, compare it with the baseline value at selection period, use paired t-test or symbol rank sum test to compare with the before-after-difference within the group.② for the counting data, use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method to compare the groups. ⑶ Shedding analysis:Comparison of groups'total shedding rates and the shedding rates caused by adverse events will use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method. ⑷ The baseline value's equilibrium analysis: Use group t test or x2 test to compare the demography info and vital signs, disease history, and basic treatment and other indicators of baseline value, so as to measure the balance of the groups. The baseline evaluation will be done on FAS(full analysis set) and PPs(per-protocol set). ⑸ Effectiveness analysis:The major indicator of effectiveness analysis is the diagnostic accuracy on malignant disease, and the indicators of second effectiveness include the percentage of Grade A specimen and complications rate etc. while the two groups rate and the Youden index comparison will use approximate normal Z test or use central effect x2 test.(6) Safety analysis:Use x2 test or Fisher's exact test to compare the adverse event/adverse reaction (include biopsy complications) rates between the groups. And use table to describe the adverse events during this trial project; the lab test results before and after the trial, the normal/abnormal changing condition and the relationship with this trial research when abnormal changes happened.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| FNA group | Experimental | Device: FNA groupFNA needles adopted to acquire lesion tissues |
| Adapt FNB group | Experimental | Device: Adapt FNB groupAdapt FNB needles adopted to acquire lesion tissues |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Over 18 years old and under 85 years old;
- Imaging examinations (MRI, CT, B-ultrasound) reveal the presence of solid masses (with a diameter > 1 cm) within the regions accessible by endoscopic ultrasound in the pancreas, peripancreatic area, liver, adrenal gland, kidney, mediastinum, lung, and gastrointestinal submucosa. Biopsy is necessary for the diagnosis of these lesions;
- Must be able to receive examinations in the research center;
- Must be able to sign the informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Hemoglobin ≤8.0 g/dL;
- Pregnant women;
- Coagulation disorders (PLT <50,000/mm3,INR > 1.5);
- Took anticoagulants such as aspirin, warfarin in the latest week;
- Acute pancreatitis in the past two weeks;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| FNA groupFine-needle-aspiration (22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22) | Device | FNA group |
| Adapt FNB groupFine-needle-biopsy (22G Adapt Aspiration) | Device | Adapt FNB group |
Primary outcome
The histological diagnostic yields
Time frame: up to 15 months
The investigators' primary outcome measure is to compare the histological diagnostic yields of 22G Adapt Aspiration FNB and FNA puncture needle (22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22) to the solid pancreatic or nonpancreatic lesions compared to conventional FNA puncture needle(22G EchoTip Ultra Echo-3-22) for pancreatic and non-pancreatic solid lesions.
4 secondary outcomes
the histological acquisition yields
Time frame: up to 15 months
the diagnostic yields of the first pass and the number of subsequent passes
Time frame: up to 15 months
the cytological diagnosis yields
Time frame: up to 15 months
the complication yields
Time frame: up to 15 months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 20 Aug 2024.
- Results publication: PubMed 35124072Gkolfakis P, Crino SF, Tziatzios G, Ramai D, Papaefthymiou A, Papanikolaou IS, Triantafyllou K, Arvanitakis M, Lisotti A, Fusaroli P, Mangiavillano B, Carrara S, Repici A, Hassan C, Facciorusso A. Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jun;95(6):1067-1077.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.01.019. Epub 2022 Feb 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 32583392van Riet PA, Erler NS, Bruno MJ, Cahen DL. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):411-423. doi: 10.1055/a-1206-5552. Epub 2020 Aug 6.
- Results publication: PubMed 28733257Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H, Dou L, Wang J, Li Y, Yang X, Jiang T, Xu G, Wang G. Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy vs Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Abdominal Masses: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;16(8):1314-1321. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.07.010. Epub 2017 Jul 19.
- Results publication: PubMed 34535035Pouw RE, Barret M, Biermann K, Bisschops R, Czako L, Gecse KB, de Hertogh G, Hucl T, Iacucci M, Jansen M, Rutter M, Savarino E, Spaander MCW, Schmidt PT, Vieth M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, van Hooft JE. Endoscopic tissue sampling - Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1174-1188. doi: 10.1055/a-1611-5091. Epub 2021 Sep 17.
- Results publication: PubMed 35151711Itonaga M, Yasukawa S, Fukutake N, Ogura T, Asada M, Shimokawa T, Inatomi O, Nakai Y, Shiomi H, Nebiki H, Suzuki A, Kitagawa K, Asai S, Shimatani M, Sanuki T, Kurita A, Takenaka M, Yoshida M, Hoki N, Yasuda H, Maruyama H, Matsumoto H, Yanagisawa A, Kitano M. Comparison of 22-gauge standard and Franseen needles in EUS-guided tissue acquisition for diagnosing solid pancreatic lesions: a multicenter randomized controlled trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jul;96(1):57-66.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.02.005. Epub 2022 Feb 11.
- Results publication: PubMed 32526235Ashat M, Klair JS, Rooney SL, Vishal SJ, Jensen C, Sahar N, Murali AR, El-Abiad R, Gerke H. Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):140-150.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.057. Epub 2020 Jun 9.
- Results publication: PubMed 31654634Kurita A, Yasukawa S, Zen Y, Yoshimura K, Ogura T, Ozawa E, Okabe Y, Asada M, Nebiki H, Shigekawa M, Ikeura T, Eguchi T, Maruyama H, Ueki T, Itonaga M, Hashimoto S, Shiomi H, Minami R, Hoki N, Takenaka M, Itokawa Y, Uza N, Hashigo S, Yasuda H, Takada R, Kamada H, Kawamoto H, Kawakami H, Moriyama I, Fujita K, Matsumoto H, Hanada K, Takemura T, Yazumi S. Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Feb;91(2):373-381.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.10.012. Epub 2019 Oct 22.
Related trials for Pancreatic Neoplasms
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
A Single-Arm Study of Nimotuzumab Combined With NALIRIFOX as First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Multicenter Validation Trial of [18F]AlF-FAPI-74 for PET Imaging of Cancer-associated Fibroblasts Through Fibroblast Activation Protein Inhibitors (FAPI) in Different Tumor Types
Oesophageal Cancer, Gastric Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1
Modified FOLFIRINOX and Pentamidine in Advanced and Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC)
RecruitingPhase 3
Atebimetinib + GnP as a First Line Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
Pancreatic Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
RecruitingPhase 3
Lanreotide Versus Placebo Before Surgery to Prevent a Surgical Complication Called a Pancreatic Fistula
Pancreatic Carcinoma, Pancreatic Neoplasm
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.
Bin Cheng principal investigator
Tongji Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing FNA group and Adapt FNB group in people with Pancreatic Neoplasms and Mediastinal Neoplasms, run by Huazhong University of Science and Technology at 1 site in China.
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 6 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 Aug 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 China. 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 Bin Cheng (+8613986097542, b.cheng@tjh.tjmu.edu.cn), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
The histological diagnostic yields (time frame: up to 15 months). 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 NCT06563232, which also lists 7 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 Aug 2024.