Diagnostic Utility of Culdocentesis in Patients With a Suspicious Adnexal Mass
NCT ID: NCT02109367
Last Updated: 2024-04-09
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
ACTIVE_NOT_RECRUITING
60 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2014-02-28
2024-06-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Specimen and Data Study for Ovarian Cancer Early Detection and Prevention
NCT00005095
Compare Fallopian Tube Cells Collected by Cytuity With Removed Ovarian/Tubal Tissue to Determine Presence of Malignancy
NCT03593681
Lavage of the Uterine Cavity for the Diagnosis of Ovarian and Tubal Carcinoma and Their Premalignant Changes.
NCT02062697
Lavage of the Uterine Cavity for the Diagnosis of Serous Tubal Intraepithelial Carcinoma
NCT02039388
Lavage of the Uterine Cavity for the Diagnosis of Ovarian and Tubal Carcinoma - Study of Sensitivity and Specificity
NCT02518256
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
If results indicate an association between cancer diagnosis and levels of CA-125 and HE4 or the ratio of estrogen metabolites from the urine, this could allow for a new minimally invasive, low-risk diagnostic modality for all suspected ovarian cancer cases. This would be particularly invaluable for patients at higher risk for poor surgical outcomes. Data from this pilot study will confirm the potential effect size needed to identify an optimal cut-point useful for the prediction of EOC within this study population.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
COHORT
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
Pelvic mass
Women who present to the Gynecologic Oncology clinic with a pelvic mass who are scheduled to undergo surgical excision.
No interventions assigned to this group
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
* Adnexal mass or suspected ovarian carcinoma.
* Patient has been scheduled for oophorectomy, bilateral salpingo- oophorectomy (BSO), hysterectomy, hysterectomy/BSO, staging or debulking.
* Willingness to sign an Informed Consent document.
Exclusion Criteria
* Patients in which culdocentesis is technically unfeasible due to previous surgery (extensive pelvic floor repair/colpocleisis) or other anatomic abnormalities that make the cul-de-sac inaccessible.
30 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
National Institutes of Health (NIH)
NIH
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
NIH
Southern Illinois University
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Laurent Brard, MD, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
Southern Illinois University
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
Southern Illinois University School of Medicine
Springfield, Illinois, United States
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Andersen MR, Goff BA, Lowe KA, Scholler N, Bergan L, Drescher CW, Paley P, Urban N. Use of a Symptom Index, CA125, and HE4 to predict ovarian cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Mar;116(3):378-83. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2009.10.087. Epub 2009 Nov 28.
Bast RC Jr. Status of tumor markers in ovarian cancer screening. J Clin Oncol. 2003 May 15;21(10 Suppl):200s-205s. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.01.068.
Moore RG, Brown AK, Miller MC, Skates S, Allard WJ, Verch T, Steinhoff M, Messerlian G, DiSilvestro P, Granai CO, Bast RC Jr. The use of multiple novel tumor biomarkers for the detection of ovarian carcinoma in patients with a pelvic mass. Gynecol Oncol. 2008 Feb;108(2):402-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2007.10.017. Epub 2007 Dec 3.
Partheen K, Kristjansdottir B, Sundfeldt K. Evaluation of ovarian cancer biomarkers HE4 and CA-125 in women presenting with a suspicious cystic ovarian mass. J Gynecol Oncol. 2011 Dec;22(4):244-52. doi: 10.3802/jgo.2011.22.4.244. Epub 2011 Dec 5.
Sandri MT, Bottari F, Franchi D, Boveri S, Candiani M, Ronzoni S, Peiretti M, Radice D, Passerini R, Sideri M. Comparison of HE4, CA125 and ROMA algorithm in women with a pelvic mass: correlation with pathological outcome. Gynecol Oncol. 2013 Feb;128(2):233-8. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2012.11.026. Epub 2012 Nov 28.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
BRARD-SIUSOM-14-001
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.