Trial Outcomes & Findings for Compare Technegas Ventilation-Perfusion SPECT and Xenon Ventilation-Perfusion Planar Imaging for Pulmonary Embolism (NCT NCT01458639)

NCT ID: NCT01458639

Last Updated: 2015-11-10

Results Overview

Compared to the sensitivity of Xenon V/Q Planar imaging. "Truth" based on blinded reader's assessments of V/Q SPECT images compared with subject's final diagnosis resulting from clinical information at 30 days follow-up.

Recruitment status

TERMINATED

Study phase

PHASE3

Target enrollment

18 participants

Primary outcome timeframe

Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Results posted on

2015-11-10

Participant Flow

The recruitment period was November 14, 2012 to June 11, 2014. Subjects were recruited from US medical centers that performed Xenon-133 ventilation scans to evaluate patients for pulmonary embolism (PE).

Subjects suspected of PE to have Xe-133 ventilation/Tc-99m macroaggregated albumin (MAA) perfusion (VQ) scan. Must have at least one within 72 hours before imaging: D-dimer, Doppler ultrasound for deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or computed tomography angiography (CTA) for PE. Not have therapeutic dose blood thinner for \> than 72 hrs prior to imaging.

Participant milestones

Participant milestones
Measure
Overall Study
Xenon-133 Ventilation Planar imaging, followed by Technegas Ventilation SPECT imaging with Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) labeled carbon particles, followed by Technetium 99m (Tc-99m) MAA Perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Xe-133 V / Tc-99m MAA Q results compared to Technegas V / Tc-99m MAA Q results.
Overall Study
STARTED
18
Overall Study
COMPLETED
12
Overall Study
NOT COMPLETED
6

Reasons for withdrawal

Reasons for withdrawal
Measure
Overall Study
Xenon-133 Ventilation Planar imaging, followed by Technegas Ventilation SPECT imaging with Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) labeled carbon particles, followed by Technetium 99m (Tc-99m) MAA Perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Xe-133 V / Tc-99m MAA Q results compared to Technegas V / Tc-99m MAA Q results.
Overall Study
Physician Decision
4
Overall Study
Equipment issue
1
Overall Study
Inability to obtain subject blood sample
1

Baseline Characteristics

Compare Technegas Ventilation-Perfusion SPECT and Xenon Ventilation-Perfusion Planar Imaging for Pulmonary Embolism

Baseline characteristics by cohort

Baseline characteristics by cohort
Measure
Overall Study
n=18 Participants
Xenon-133 Ventilation Planar imaging, followed by Technegas Ventilation SPECT imaging with Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) labeled carbon particles, followed by Technetium 99m (Tc-99m) MAA Perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Xe-133 V / Tc-99m MAA Q results compared to Technegas V / Tc-99m MAA Q results.
Age, Categorical
<=18 years
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
Between 18 and 65 years
12 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Categorical
>=65 years
6 Participants
n=5 Participants
Age, Continuous
59.5 years
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Female
7 Participants
n=5 Participants
Sex: Female, Male
Male
11 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Hispanic or Latino
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Not Hispanic or Latino
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
Ethnicity (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
American Indian or Alaska Native
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Asian
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Black or African American
8 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
White
10 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
More than one race
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Race (NIH/OMB)
Unknown or Not Reported
0 Participants
n=5 Participants
Region of Enrollment
United States
18 participants
n=5 Participants

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Population: Pulmonary embolism adjudication was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee for primary and secondary outcome data and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

Compared to the sensitivity of Xenon V/Q Planar imaging. "Truth" based on blinded reader's assessments of V/Q SPECT images compared with subject's final diagnosis resulting from clinical information at 30 days follow-up.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

PRIMARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Population: Pulmonary embolism adjudication was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee for primary and secondary outcome data and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

Compared to the specificity of Xenon V/Q Planar imaging. "Truth" based on blinded reader's assessments of V/Q SPECT images compared with subject's final diagnosis resulting from clinical information at 30 days follow-up.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: prospective, 30 days follow-up.

Population: PE adjudication for final clinical diagnosis was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary and secondary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

Accuracy of V/Q imaging for diagnosis of PE is determined by the results of blind-read assessment of images compared with truth using a subject's final clinical diagnosis following 30-day follow-up of occurence of PE or death, whichever occurs first.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Population: PE adjudication for final clinical diagnosis was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary and secondary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

PPV of V/Q imaging for diagnosis of PE is determined by the results of blind-read assessment of images compared with truth using a subject's final clinical diagnosis following 30-day follow-up of occurence of PE or death, whichever occurs first.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Population: PE adjudication for final clinical diagnosis was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary and secondary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

NPV of V/Q imaging for diagnosis of PE is determined by the results of blind-read assessment of images compared with truth using a subject's final clinical diagnosis following 30-day follow-up of occurence of PE or death, whichever occurs first.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, 30 days follow-up

Population: PE adjudication for final clinical diagnosis was to be determined by an Independent Adjudication Committee and blinded readings of Xe-133 and Technegas Ventilation and Tc-99m MAA Perfusion images were required for primary and secondary outcome data. Due to trial termination PE adjudication and blinded readings of images were not done.

Likelihood ratios of V/Q imaging for diagnosis of PE is determined by the results of blind-read assessment of images compared with truth using a subject's final clinical diagnosis following 30-day follow-up of occurence of PE or death, whichever occurs first.

Outcome measures

Outcome data not reported

SECONDARY outcome

Timeframe: Prospective, from enrollment through 30 days follow-up

Population: All subjects who received Technegas and completed safety follow-up procedures.

Safety will be assessed by the incidence of treatment emergence adverse events and changes in clinical laboratory measurements, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, physical examination and pulmonary examination before and after treatment.

Outcome measures

Outcome measures
Measure
Overall Study
n=12 Participants
Xenon-133 Ventilation Planar imaging, followed by Technegas Ventilation SPECT imaging with Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) labeled carbon particles, followed by Technetium 99m (Tc-99m) MAA Perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Xe-133 V / Tc-99m MAA Q results compared to Technegas V / Tc-99m MAA Q results.
Safety of Technegas in Patients With Possible PE
Serious adverse events
0 participants
Safety of Technegas in Patients With Possible PE
Other (not including serious) adverse events
1 participants

Adverse Events

Overall Study

Serious events: 0 serious events
Other events: 1 other events
Deaths: 0 deaths

Serious adverse events

Adverse event data not reported

Other adverse events

Other adverse events
Measure
Overall Study
n=12 participants at risk
Xenon-133 Ventilation Planar imaging, followed by Technegas Ventilation SPECT imaging with Technetium-99m (Tc-99m) labeled carbon particles, followed by Technetium 99m (Tc-99m) MAA Perfusion imaging for the diagnosis of pulmonary embolism. Xe-133 V / Tc-99m MAA Q results compared to Technegas V / Tc-99m MAA Q results.
Investigations
Systolic blood pressure increase
8.3%
1/12 • Number of events 1 • 24 (+/- 4) hours post Technegas ventilation/perfusion (V/Q) scan.
Safety assessment was performed from the start of the Xe-133 ventilation scan, followed by the Technegas ventilation scan, followed by the Tc-99m MAA scan until 24 (+/- 4) hours after the Technegas ventilation scan.

Additional Information

Gary Somerville, Quality and Regulatory Manager

Cyclomedica Australia Pty Ltd

Phone: +61 (0)2 9541 0411

Results disclosure agreements

  • Principal investigator is a sponsor employee
  • Publication restrictions are in place