Ultrasound-guided Tru-Cut Biopsy in Pelvic Masses.

NCT ID: NCT05610501

Last Updated: 2024-07-03

Basic Information

• Recruitment Status: RECRUITING
• Total Enrollment: 200 participants
• Study Classification: OBSERVATIONAL
• Study Start Date: 2021-05-01
• Study Completion Date: 2025-04-30

Brief Summary

In a transvaginal tru-cut biopsy, guided by ultrasound, a needle is inserted through the vaginal wall into a pelvic lesion and a few pieces of tissue are obtained for examination.

This clinical trial is organized to evaluate the safety and efficacy of transvaginal tru-cut biopsy in a large group of patients with tumors in the small pelvis.

Detailed Description

Ovarian cancer is known to be the 4th most lethal tumour in women and has the highest mortality rate of all gynaecological malignancies. In most women, the disease is not diagnosed until advanced stage [1]. Moreover, the pelvis and ovaries in particular, are also a common place for secondary metastases. In 4% of ovarian masses, metastasis can be found from a tumour with another primary origin [2]. In primary ovarian cancer, patients may benefit from either primary debulking surgery or neoadjuvant therapy, depending on tumour staging and patients' comorbidities [5]. In recurrent disease treatment may include surgery, radiotherapy or systemic therapy, depending on primary tumour histology, extent of recurrence, previous treatment and disease-free interval [6-8]. In pelvic masses with ultrasound features suggesting metastatic disease, management will be guided by the origin of the primary tumour [9,10]. Therefore, histological diagnosis is important to select the optimal treatment strategy.

Tissue sampling by diagnostic laparoscopy or explorative laparotomy requires general anaesthesia and hospital admission, leading to higher costs and to potential surgical morbidity. Moreover, diagnostic laparoscopy is associated with a risk of port-site metastasis, ranging from 0.3-0.4% in endometrial and cervical cancer [11] and even 17-49% in advanced ovarian cancer [12,13].

Minimally invasive procedures for diagnosis include fine-needle aspiration and tru-cut biopsy.

At fine-needle aspiration the quantity and integrity of the tissue is limited, enabling cytological evaluation only [14]. Tru-cut biopsy results in a higher specificity compared to fine needle biopsy and it enables histological examination including immunohistochemistry [15,16].

A tru-cut biopsy can be performed under the guidance of different imaging modalities including ultrasound, Computed Tomography (CT) and Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI). However, percutaneous CT-guided biopsies of deep pelvic masses are challenging because vital structures often obstruct the needle pathway [17].

Previous studies have investigated the use of ultrasound-guided biopsies for the assessment of abdominal and pelvic masses which showed a high diagnostic adequacy and minimal complication rate [4,16,18-25]. This can be done by percutaneous transabdominal approach , a transvaginal or transrectal approach.

The main goal of this prospective study is to evaluate the safety and tissue yield of ultrasound guided transvaginal or transrectal tru-cut biopsy in patients with pelvic tumors. Secondly, factors affecting the reliability of the biopsy-results will be analyzed, as well as patients' experience and pain. Finally, a comparison of biopsy results and final histological diagnosis will be performed in those patients undergoing surgical management.

5. Study aims Primary Aim The main goal of our study is 1) to evaluate the safety (defined as absence of procedure-related complications) and 2) tissue yield (defined as sufficient amount of tissue for histological analysis) of ultrasound guided transvaginal or transrectal tru-cut biopsy in patients with pelvic masses.

Secondary Aims

• Analyzing factors affecting the safety and tissue yield. (The influence of selected variables such as number of biopsies per target lesion, length of the shot (15 vs 22 mm), thickness of needle (16-18 G), target lesion, target lesion size, histotypes etc. on these outcomes will be assessed.)
• Assessment of patients' overall experience, assessment of pain and discomfort during the procedure and afterwards.
• Comparison of biopsy result with final histological diagnosis: histological type (only in patients finally undergoing surgery)

Study design Prospective multicentric observational study

Conditions

Pelvic Cancer; Ovarian Cancer; Cervical Cancer; Uterus Cancer; Endometrial Cancer; Ovarian Neoplasms; Ovarian Carcinoma; Sarcoma Uterus; Metastatic Cancer

Study Design

• Observational Model Type: COHORT
• Study Time Perspective: PROSPECTIVE

Study Groups

Patient population

All consecutive patients (> 18 years) undergoing a tru-cut biopsy at the participating centers during the study periof will be eligible for inclusion in the study.

All biopsies will be performed by trained operators in gynecologic ultrasound and tru-cut biopsies. Tissue samples will be assessed by experienced pathologists, dedicated in gynecologic oncology. Data will be collected by reviewing patients' electronic medical file including data concerning further treatment-strategy and pathology reports. Patients' level of pain and overall experience will be assessed by an independent investigator not present during biopsy. This will be performed from 0-72h after the biopsy using a numeric rating scale (0-100). Safety and complication-rate will be assessed by both using the collected data and via postprocedural assessment and by phone after six weeks. Inclusion and exclusion criteria can be found elsewhere.

Ultrasound guided tru-cut biopsy

Intervention Type: PROCEDURE

Tru-cut biopsies can collect tissue specimens via a needle of 18G A tru-cut biopsy can be performed under the guidance of different imaging modalities including ultrasound

Interventions

Ultrasound guided tru-cut biopsy

Tru-cut biopsies can collect tissue specimens via a needle of 18G A tru-cut biopsy can be performed under the guidance of different imaging modalities including ultrasound

Intervention Type: PROCEDURE

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

• 1. Following lesion criteria applicable for biopsy:

1. Lesion safely accessible (no visceral or vessel interposition; in the case of a transvaginal approach no vaginal stenosis (severe atrophy - virgo - vaginismus); within reach of biopsy needle)

2. Solid component present (purely cystic lesions excluded)

2. Biopsy for research purposes, the following is applicable: Patients with a gynecological tumor eligible for participation in academic or commercial clinical trials requesting a biopsy for translational research. For the current study, which is observational, we do not intend to take additional biopsies outside routine clinical practice, but only biopsies requested for participation in other (interventional) studies on systemic treatment in gynecologic oncology.

<!-- -->

1. Suspicious primary disseminated gynecologic tumor (tumor itself or metastasis) Patients with a presumable new diagnosis of a disseminated pelvic tumor where histological confirmation of disease is necessary before the possibility to start a specific oncologic treatment and

• Are invalid candidates for primary (radical) surgery due to comorbidities or poor overall general wellbeing
• Are invalid candidates for primary (radical) surgery due to the extensive disease-spread according to imaging and/or diagnostic laparoscopy

2. Suspicious primary disseminated NON-gynecologic tumor (tumor itself or metastasis)

3. Patients with possible recurrence of a gynecological tumor (cervix, myometrial, endometrial, ovarian etc), where histological confirmation of disease recurrence is necessary before the possibility to start a surgical or systemic intervention.

4. Patients with possible recurrence of a presumably non-gynecological tumor, where histological confirmation of disease recurrence is necessary before start of treatment.

5. Solitary tumor of unknown histology localized in vaginal wall, parametria, retroperitoneum or uterine wall and can be punctured without spilling in abdominal cavity.

Exclusion Criteria

• 1. Patients < 18 years 2. Clotting defect or anticoagulation therapy, precluding a safe biopsy even with adapted therapy regimen.

3. Vaginal or pelvic infection 4. Poor performance status contraindicating any specific oncologic treatment

• Minimum Eligible Age: 18 Years
• Eligible Sex: FEMALE
• Accepts Healthy Volunteers: No

Sponsors

UZ Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCSS, Rome, Italy.

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic.

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Karolinska Institutet and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.

UNKNOWN

Sponsor Role: collaborator

Universitaire Ziekenhuizen KU Leuven

OTHER

Sponsor Role: lead

Responsible Party

Responsibility Role: SPONSOR

Locations

UZ Leuven

Leuven, , Belgium

Site Status: RECRUITING

First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University

Prague, , Czechia

Site Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli, IRCSS

Rome, , Italy

Site Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet and Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Södersjukhuset

Stockholm, , Sweden

Site Status: NOT_YET_RECRUITING

Countries

Belgium; Czechia; Italy; Sweden

Central Contacts

Wouter Froyman, MD, PHD

Role: CONTACT

wouter.froyman@uzleuven.be

+3216344202

Stefan Timmerman, MD

Role: CONTACT

stefan.timmerman@uzleuven.be

Facility Contacts

Wouter Froyman, MD, PhD

Role: primary

wouter.froyman@uzleuven.be

+3216344202

Daniela Fischerova, MD, PHD

Role: primary

Daniela.Fischerova@vfn.cz

Antonia Carla Testa, MD, PHD

Role: primary

antoniacarla.testa@unicatt.it

Elisabeth Epstein, MD, PHD

Role: primary

elisabeth.epstein@regionstockholm.se

References

Chandra A, Pius C, Nabeel M, Nair M, Vishwanatha JK, Ahmad S, Basha R. Ovarian cancer: Current status and strategies for improving therapeutic outcomes. Cancer Med. 2019 Nov;8(16):7018-7031. doi: 10.1002/cam4.2560. Epub 2019 Sep 27.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 31560828 (View on PubMed)

Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Valentin L, Testa AC, Fischerova D, Van Holsbeke C, Savelli L, Franchi D, Epstein E, Kaijser J, Van Belle V, Czekierdowski A, Guerriero S, Fruscio R, Lanzani C, Scala F, Bourne T, Timmerman D; International Ovarian Tumour Analysis Group. Evaluating the risk of ovarian cancer before surgery using the ADNEX model to differentiate between benign, borderline, early and advanced stage invasive, and secondary metastatic tumours: prospective multicentre diagnostic study. BMJ. 2014 Oct 15;349:g5920. doi: 10.1136/bmj.g5920.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 25320247 (View on PubMed)

Testa AC, Ferrandina G, Timmerman D, Savelli L, Ludovisi M, Van Holsbeke C, Malaggese M, Scambia G, Valentin L. Imaging in gynecological disease (1): ultrasound features of metastases in the ovaries differ depending on the origin of the primary tumor. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2007 May;29(5):505-11. doi: 10.1002/uog.4020.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 17444565 (View on PubMed)

Epstein E, Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Nikman S. Subjective ultrasound assessment, the ADNEX model and ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy to differentiate disseminated primary ovarian cancer from metastatic non-ovarian cancer. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jan;47(1):110-6. doi: 10.1002/uog.14892.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 25925783 (View on PubMed)

Vergote I, Trope CG, Amant F, Kristensen GB, Ehlen T, Johnson N, Verheijen RH, van der Burg ME, Lacave AJ, Panici PB, Kenter GG, Casado A, Mendiola C, Coens C, Verleye L, Stuart GC, Pecorelli S, Reed NS; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer-Gynaecological Cancer Group; NCIC Clinical Trials Group. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy or primary surgery in stage IIIC or IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010 Sep 2;363(10):943-53. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0908806.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 20818904 (View on PubMed)

Peiretti M, Zapardiel I, Zanagnolo V, Landoni F, Morrow CP, Maggioni A. Management of recurrent cervical cancer: a review of the literature. Surg Oncol. 2012 Jun;21(2):e59-66. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2011.12.008. Epub 2012 Jan 14.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 22244884 (View on PubMed)

Al Rawahi T, Lopes AD, Bristow RE, Bryant A, Elattar A, Chattopadhyay S, Galaal K. Surgical cytoreduction for recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Feb 28;2013(2):CD008765. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD008765.pub3.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 23450588 (View on PubMed)

Bradford LS, Rauh-Hain JA, Schorge J, Birrer MJ, Dizon DS. Advances in the management of recurrent endometrial cancer. Am J Clin Oncol. 2015 Apr;38(2):206-12. doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e31829a2974.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 23764681 (View on PubMed)

Van Calster B, Van Hoorde K, Froyman W, Kaijser J, Wynants L, Landolfo C, Anthoulakis C, Vergote I, Bourne T, Timmerman D. Practical guidance for applying the ADNEX model from the IOTA group to discriminate between different subtypes of adnexal tumors. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2015;7(1):32-41.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 25897370 (View on PubMed)

Agnes A, Biondi A, Ricci R, Gallotta V, D'Ugo D, Persiani R. Krukenberg tumors: Seed, route and soil. Surg Oncol. 2017 Dec;26(4):438-445. doi: 10.1016/j.suronc.2017.09.001. Epub 2017 Sep 12.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 29113663 (View on PubMed)

Martinez A, Querleu D, Leblanc E, Narducci F, Ferron G. Low incidence of port-site metastases after laparoscopic staging of uterine cancer. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 Aug 1;118(2):145-50. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.03.011. Epub 2010 May 7.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 20451983 (View on PubMed)

Vergote I, Marquette S, Amant F, Berteloot P, Neven P. Port-site metastases after open laparoscopy: a study in 173 patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2005 Sep-Oct;15(5):776-9. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2005.00135.x.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 16174223 (View on PubMed)

Heitz F, Ognjenovic D, Harter P, Kommoss S, Ewald-Riegler N, Haberstroh M, Gomez R, Barinoff J, Traut A, du Bois A. Abdominal wall metastases in patients with ovarian cancer after laparoscopic surgery: incidence, risk factors, and complications. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2010 Jan;20(1):41-6. doi: 10.1111/IGC.0b013e3181c443ba.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 20057285 (View on PubMed)

Malmstrom H. Fine-needle aspiration cytology versus core biopsies in the evaluation of recurrent gynecologic malignancies. Gynecol Oncol. 1997 Apr;65(1):69-73. doi: 10.1006/gyno.1996.4606.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 9103393 (View on PubMed)

Chojniak R, Isberner RK, Viana LM, Yu LS, Aita AA, Soares FA. Computed tomography guided needle biopsy: experience from 1,300 procedures. Sao Paulo Med J. 2006 Jan 5;124(1):10-4. doi: 10.1590/s1516-31802006000100003. Epub 2006 Apr 3.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 16612456 (View on PubMed)

Fischerova D, Cibula D, Dundr P, Zikan M, Calda P, Freitag P, Slama J. Ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy in the management of advanced abdomino-pelvic tumors. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008 Jul-Aug;18(4):833-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1525-1438.2007.01015.x. Epub 2007 Aug 30.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 17764453 (View on PubMed)

Gupta S, Nguyen HL, Morello FA Jr, Ahrar K, Wallace MJ, Madoff DC, Murthy R, Hicks ME. Various approaches for CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of deep pelvic lesions: anatomic and technical considerations. Radiographics. 2004 Jan-Feb;24(1):175-89. doi: 10.1148/rg.241035063.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 14730045 (View on PubMed)

Volpi E, Zola P, De Grandis T, Rumore A, Volpe T, Sismondi P. Transvaginal sonography in the diagnosis of pelvic malignant recurrence: integration of sonography and needle-guided biopsy. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1994 Mar 1;4(2):135-8. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1994.04020135.x.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 12797207 (View on PubMed)

Sheth SS, Angirish J. Transvaginal trucut biopsy in patients with abdominopelvic mass. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 1995 Jul;50(1):27-31. doi: 10.1016/0020-7292(95)02433-d.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 7556856 (View on PubMed)

Faulkner RL, Mohiyiddeen L, McVey R, Kitchener HC. Transvaginal biopsy in the diagnosis of ovarian cancer. BJOG. 2005 Jul;112(7):991-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-0528.2005.00619.x.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 15958006 (View on PubMed)

Zikan M, Fischerova D, Pinkavova I, Dundr P, Cibula D. Ultrasound-guided tru-cut biopsy of abdominal and pelvic tumors in gynecology. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2010 Dec;36(6):767-72. doi: 10.1002/uog.8803.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 20737454 (View on PubMed)

Kong TW, Chang SJ, Paek J, Cho H, Lee Y, Lee EJ, Ryu HS. Transvaginal Sonography-Guided Core Biopsy of Adnexal Masses as a Useful Diagnostic Alternative Replacing Cytologic Examination or Laparoscopy in Advanced Ovarian Cancer Patients. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016 Jul;26(6):1041-7. doi: 10.1097/IGC.0000000000000728.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 27206281 (View on PubMed)

Park JJ, Kim CK, Park BK. Ultrasound-Guided Transvaginal Core Biopsy of Pelvic Masses: Feasibility, Safety, and Short-Term Follow-Up. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2016 Apr;206(4):877-82. doi: 10.2214/AJR.15.15702. Epub 2016 Feb 25.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 26913556 (View on PubMed)

Zahedi R, Uppal S, Mendiratta-Lala M, Higgins EJ, Nettles AN, Maturen KE. Percutaneous image-guided pelvic procedures in women with gynecologic cancers: utilization, complications, and impact on patient management. Abdom Radiol (NY). 2016 Dec;41(12):2460-2465. doi: 10.1007/s00261-016-0882-9.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 27565659 (View on PubMed)

Lin SY, Xiong YH, Yun M, Liu LZ, Zheng W, Lin X, Pei XQ, Li AH. Transvaginal Ultrasound-Guided Core Needle Biopsy of Pelvic Masses. J Ultrasound Med. 2018 Feb;37(2):453-461. doi: 10.1002/jum.14356. Epub 2017 Sep 8.

Reference Type: BACKGROUND

PMID: 28885718 (View on PubMed)

Other Identifiers

S64793

Identifier Type: -

Identifier Source: org_study_id