Back to resultsSafety and Efficacy of Gadobutrol 1.0 Molar (Gadavist) in Patients for Central Nervous System (CNS) Imaging
Primary Purpose
Diagnostic Imaging, Central Nervous System Diseases
Status
Completed
Phase
Phase 3
Locations
International
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Gadobutrol (Gadavist, Gadovist, BAY86-4875)
Gadoteridol (ProHance)
Sponsored by
About this trial
This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Diagnostic Imaging focused on measuring Patients referred for a contrast-enhanced MRI of the CNS, CNS Imaging
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- Is at least 18 years of age
- Is referred for a contrast-enhanced MRI of the CNS based on current clinical symptoms or results of a previous imaging procedure
- Has been fully informed about the study, including provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as applicable, and has consented to participate
Exclusion Criteria:
- Has any contraindication to the MRI examinations or the use of Gd-containing contrast agents
- Has a history of severe allergic or anaphylactoid reaction to any allergen including drugs and contrast agents
- Has severe cardiovascular disease (eg, known long QT syndrome, acute myocardial infarction [< 14 days], unstable angina, congestive heart failure New York Heart Association class IV) or acute stroke (< 48 hours)- Patients with acute renal insufficiency of any severity due to hepato-renal syndrome or in the perioperative liver transplantation period
Sites / Locations
- West Alabama Research, Inc.
- Achieve Clinical Research, LLC
- Los Gatos MRI
- Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
- Redwood Regional Medical Group, Inc.
- University of Florida - Jacksonville
- NorthShore University HealthSystem-Evanston Hospital
- Atchison Hospital
- University of Maryland Hospital System
- Johns Hopkins Hospital/Health System
- Shields MRI - Brockton
- VA Boston Healthcare System-West Roxbury Division
- Washington University School of Medicine
- University of New Mexico School of Medicine
- Kingston Neurological Associates, PC
- NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases
- Duke University Medical Center
- The Cleveland Clinic
- Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
- Allegheny General Hospital
- Rhode Island Hospital
- Medical University of South Carolina
- University of Washington Medical Center
- Aurora Saint Luke's Medical Center
- Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
- St George Hospital
- Westmead Hospital
- Monash Medical Centre
- Landeskrankenhaus Donauregion Tulln
- LNK Wagner Jauregg
- Medizinische Universität Graz
- Allgemeines Krankenhaus der Stadt Wien Universitätskliniken
- Fundación Instituto de Alta tecnología médica de Antioquia
- Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá - Hospital Universitario
- DIME Clinica Neurocardiovascular S.A.
- Centro de Diagnostico Medico
- Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
- Städtisches Klinikum Karlsruhe gGmbH
- Klinikum Mannheim gGmbH
- Zentralklinikum Augsburg
- Universitätsklinikum Erlangen
- LMU Klinikum der Universität München - Großhadern
- Klinikum rechts der Isar
- Klinikum Ernst von Bergmann
- Krankenhaus Nordwest
- Kliniken der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover
- Medizinische Einrichtungen der Universität Bonn
- Medizinisches Versorgungszentrum Prof. Dr. D. Uhlenbrock
- Universitätsklinikum Köln
- Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes
- Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus
- Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
- Klinikum der Christian-Albrechts-Universität
- HELIOS Klinikum Erfurt GmbH
- Universitätsklinikum Charite zu Berlin
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf (UKE)
- CT /MRI centre
- Piramal Diagnostic- Jankharia Imaging
- Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences
- Bombay Hospital, Institute of Medical sciences
- Nagoya Kyoritsu Clinic
- Nagoya Kyoritsu Hospital
- Social Insurance Chukyo Hospital
- Himeji Medical Center
- Himeji Central Hospital
- Institute of Biomedical Research and Innovation
- Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital
- Shinsuma Hospital
- Kishiwada Tokushukai Hospital
- Shimonoseki Kosei Hospital
- Utano National Hospital
- Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases
- Osaka National Hospital
- Osaka General Medical Center
- Universitätsspital Basel
- Kantonsspital St. Gallen
- Inselspital Bern
- Hôpital Cantonal Universitaire de Genève
- Luzerner Kantonsspital
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
Experimental
Experimental
Arm Label
Gadobutrol then Gadoteridol
Gadoteridol then Gadobutrol
Arm Description
Participants received a single dose of gadobutrol 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) via i.v. (intravenous) in Period 1 and a single dose of gadoteridol at the approved dose, 0.1 mmol/kg bw, via i.v. in Period 2.
Participants received a single dose of gadoteridol at the approved dose, 0.1 mmol/kg bw, via i.v. in Period 1 and a single dose of gadobutrol 0.1 mmol/kg bw via i.v. in Period 2.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Readers
The blinded readers evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Secondary Outcome Measures
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI or for Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Readers
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI or for Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI or for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Scores for Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Scores for Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the clinical investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced MR image sets and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Comparison of Image Quality Between Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
The BRs evaluated the relative image quality of the gadobutrol-enhanced T1w MR images and the gadoteridol-enhanced T1w MR images in a paired fashion on a 5-point scale where 1 = image on right was worse, 2 = image on right was slightly worse, 3 = both images were the same, 4 = image on right was slightly better, and 5 = image on right was better.
Percentage of Participants for Which Blinded Readers Said Image Quality Was Higher
Percentage of participants for which blinded readers said image quality was higher
Assessment of the Number of Contrast-enhanced Lesions for Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
Two BRs independently provided the number of contrast-enhanced lesions for gadobutrol and gadoteridol. In cases of disagreement between the readers, an independent adjudicator provided the number of contrast-enhanced lesions. The adjudicator results were used in the analysis in the cases of disagreement between the original readers
Percentage of Lesion Enhancement From Unenhanced to Combined Unenhanced/Enhanced for Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
From the quantitative signal intensity values assessed by the BR, the percentage of lesion enhancement from unenhanced to combined unenhanced/enhanced was calculated.
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT00709852
Brief Title
Safety and Efficacy of Gadobutrol 1.0 Molar (Gadavist) in Patients for Central Nervous System (CNS) Imaging
Official Title
A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Crossover, Phase 3 Study to Determine the Safety and Efficacy of Gadobutrol 1.0 Molar (Gadavist) in Patients Referred for Contrast-enhanced MRI of the Central Nervous System (CNS)
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
December 2014
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
June 2008 (undefined)
Primary Completion Date
April 2009 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
April 2009 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Bayer
4. Oversight
Data Monitoring Committee
No
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
This study involves the use of Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) contrast agents called gadobutrol (Gadavist) Injection and ProHance Injection. The purpose of this study is to look at the safety (what are the side effects) and efficacy (how well does it work) of gadobutrol when used for taking MR images of the brain and spine. The results of the MRI with gadobutrol Injection will be compared to the results of MR images taken without contrast and with the results of the MR images taken with ProHance.
Detailed Description
Issues on safety will be addressed in Adverse Events section.
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Diagnostic Imaging, Central Nervous System Diseases
Keywords
Patients referred for a contrast-enhanced MRI of the CNS, CNS Imaging
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Diagnostic
Study Phase
Phase 3
Interventional Study Model
Crossover Assignment
Masking
ParticipantCare ProviderInvestigatorOutcomes Assessor
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
402 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
Gadobutrol then Gadoteridol
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Participants received a single dose of gadobutrol 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) via i.v. (intravenous) in Period 1 and a single dose of gadoteridol at the approved dose, 0.1 mmol/kg bw, via i.v. in Period 2.
Arm Title
Gadoteridol then Gadobutrol
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
Participants received a single dose of gadoteridol at the approved dose, 0.1 mmol/kg bw, via i.v. in Period 1 and a single dose of gadobutrol 0.1 mmol/kg bw via i.v. in Period 2.
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Gadobutrol (Gadavist, Gadovist, BAY86-4875)
Intervention Description
Participants received a single dose of gadobutrol 0.1 mmol/kg body weight (bw) via i.v. (intravenous)
Intervention Type
Drug
Intervention Name(s)
Gadoteridol (ProHance)
Intervention Description
Participants received a single dose of gadoteridol at the approved dose, 0.1 mmol/kg bw, via i.v.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
Description
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
Description
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
Description
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Readers
Description
The blinded readers evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
Description
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
Description
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
Description
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 1 (BR1)
Description
BR1 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 2 (BR2)
Description
BR2 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Reader 3 (BR3)
Description
BR3 evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader (AR)
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI or for Unenhanced MRI by Blinded Readers
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI or for Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Percentage of Participants With More Lesions Detected for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI or for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The AR analysis used the mean of the values for the 3 blinded readers. The 3 BRs evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in one session and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another and determined the number of lesion from each.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Two Visualization Parameters (Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the unenhanced MRI and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Three Visualization Parameters (Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Number of Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs in another to determine the total number of lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology for Normal Structures for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Scores for Contrast Enhancement, Border Delineation and Internal Morphology for Lesions for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The clinical investigators evaluated the images from the combined unenhanced and gadobutrol-enhanced MRIs and the images from the combined unenhanced and gadoteridol-enhanced MRIs. Contrast enhancement was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no enhancement and 4 = excellent enhancement. Border delineation was scored on a 4-point scale where 1 = no or unclear delineation and 4 = excellent delineation. Internal morphology was scored on a 3-point scale where 1 = poorly visible and 3 = sufficiently visible.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced and the unenhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the majority reader diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Percentage (Per.) of the Exact Diagnostic Matches (Accuracy of Diagnosis) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. The accuracy of the clinical investigator diagnoses for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR images were evaluated for consistency with the final clinical diagnosis.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of abnormal brain tissue.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Normal/Abnormal Brain Tissue for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader Using T1-weighted (T1w) Images
Description
The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs for the T1w assessment (normal or abnormal). The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes abnormal brain tissue as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadobutrol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (unenhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Majority Reader
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The majority reader diagnosis was the diagnosis provided by at least 2 of the 3 BRs. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee not using the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Accuracy of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Accuracy = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) matches the standard of truth for the presence or absence of malignant lesions.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Sensitivity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Sensitivity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly detects malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Specificity of Detection of Malignant Lesions (ML) for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The presence of malignant lesions was derived from the diagnoses given by the investigator on the evaluation of the unenhanced image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced image sets. The final clinical diagnosis was provided by an independent truth committee following evaluation of findings from referral through a 3-month follow-up period, not including the study-specific MR image sets. Specificity = percentage of participants for which the imaging modality (Gadobutrol-enhanced or Gadoteridol-enhanced) correctly excludes malignant lesions as defined by the independent truth committee.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Average Reader
Description
The BRs recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the combined unenhanced/enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident. The AR score was the mean of the means of the 3 BRs.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI Compared to Unenhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the unenhanced MR image set and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol-enhanced MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadoteridol
Title
Diagnostic Confidence for Combined Unenhanced/Gadobutrol-enhanced MRI Compared to Combined Unenhanced/Gadoteridol-enhanced MRI by Clinical Investigator
Description
The investigator recorded his/her confidence in diagnosis for the combined unenhanced/gadobutrol-enhanced MR image sets and the combined unenhanced/gadoteridol MR image sets. The degree of confidence was rated on a 4-point scale where 1 = not confident and 4 = very confident.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Comparison of Image Quality Between Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
Description
The BRs evaluated the relative image quality of the gadobutrol-enhanced T1w MR images and the gadoteridol-enhanced T1w MR images in a paired fashion on a 5-point scale where 1 = image on right was worse, 2 = image on right was slightly worse, 3 = both images were the same, 4 = image on right was slightly better, and 5 = image on right was better.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Percentage of Participants for Which Blinded Readers Said Image Quality Was Higher
Description
Percentage of participants for which blinded readers said image quality was higher
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Assessment of the Number of Contrast-enhanced Lesions for Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
Description
Two BRs independently provided the number of contrast-enhanced lesions for gadobutrol and gadoteridol. In cases of disagreement between the readers, an independent adjudicator provided the number of contrast-enhanced lesions. The adjudicator results were used in the analysis in the cases of disagreement between the original readers
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
Title
Percentage of Lesion Enhancement From Unenhanced to Combined Unenhanced/Enhanced for Gadobutrol and Gadoteridol by Blinded Readers
Description
From the quantitative signal intensity values assessed by the BR, the percentage of lesion enhancement from unenhanced to combined unenhanced/enhanced was calculated.
Time Frame
Up to 2 hours after injection of gadobutrol or gadoteridol
10. Eligibility
Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
Is at least 18 years of age
Is referred for a contrast-enhanced MRI of the CNS based on current clinical symptoms or results of a previous imaging procedure
Has been fully informed about the study, including provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) as applicable, and has consented to participate
Exclusion Criteria:
Has any contraindication to the MRI examinations or the use of Gd-containing contrast agents
Has a history of severe allergic or anaphylactoid reaction to any allergen including drugs and contrast agents
Has severe cardiovascular disease (eg, known long QT syndrome, acute myocardial infarction [< 14 days], unstable angina, congestive heart failure New York Heart Association class IV) or acute stroke (< 48 hours)- Patients with acute renal insufficiency of any severity due to hepato-renal syndrome or in the perioperative liver transplantation period
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Bayer Study Director
Organizational Affiliation
Bayer
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
Facility Name
West Alabama Research, Inc.
City
Birmingham
State/Province
Alabama
ZIP/Postal Code
35209
Country
United States
Facility Name
Achieve Clinical Research, LLC
City
Tuscaloosa
State/Province
Alabama
ZIP/Postal Code
35406
Country
United States
Facility Name
Los Gatos MRI
City
Los Gatos
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
95032
Country
United States
Facility Name
Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian
City
Newport Beach
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
92658-6100
Country
United States
Facility Name
Redwood Regional Medical Group, Inc.
City
Santa Rosa
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
95403
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Florida - Jacksonville
City
Jacksonville
State/Province
Florida
ZIP/Postal Code
32209
Country
United States
Facility Name
NorthShore University HealthSystem-Evanston Hospital
City
Evanston
State/Province
Illinois
ZIP/Postal Code
60201
Country
United States
Facility Name
Atchison Hospital
City
Atchison
State/Province
Kansas
ZIP/Postal Code
66002
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Maryland Hospital System
City
Baltimore
State/Province
Maryland
ZIP/Postal Code
21201
Country
United States
Facility Name
Johns Hopkins Hospital/Health System
City
Baltimore
State/Province
Maryland
ZIP/Postal Code
21287
Country
United States
Facility Name
Shields MRI - Brockton
City
Brockton
State/Province
Massachusetts
ZIP/Postal Code
02301
Country
United States
Facility Name
VA Boston Healthcare System-West Roxbury Division
City
West Roxbury
State/Province
Massachusetts
ZIP/Postal Code
02132
Country
United States
Facility Name
Washington University School of Medicine
City
St. Louis
State/Province
Missouri
ZIP/Postal Code
63110
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of New Mexico School of Medicine
City
Alburquerque
State/Province
New Mexico
ZIP/Postal Code
87131
Country
United States
Facility Name
Kingston Neurological Associates, PC
City
Kingston
State/Province
New York
ZIP/Postal Code
12401
Country
United States
Facility Name
NYU Hospital for Joint Diseases
City
New York
State/Province
New York
ZIP/Postal Code
10003
Country
United States
Facility Name
Duke University Medical Center
City
Durham
State/Province
North Carolina
ZIP/Postal Code
27707
Country
United States
Facility Name
The Cleveland Clinic
City
Cleveland
State/Province
Ohio
ZIP/Postal Code
44195
Country
United States
Facility Name
Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania
City
Philadelphia
State/Province
Pennsylvania
ZIP/Postal Code
19104
Country
United States
Facility Name
Allegheny General Hospital
City
Pittsburgh
State/Province
Pennsylvania
ZIP/Postal Code
15212
Country
United States
Facility Name
Rhode Island Hospital
City
Providence
State/Province
Rhode Island
ZIP/Postal Code
02903
Country
United States
Facility Name
Medical University of South Carolina
City
Charleston
State/Province
South Carolina
ZIP/Postal Code
29425
Country
United States
Facility Name
University of Washington Medical Center
City
Seattle
State/Province
Washington
ZIP/Postal Code
98195
Country
United States
Facility Name
Aurora Saint Luke's Medical Center
City
Milwaukee
State/Province
Wisconsin
ZIP/Postal Code
53215
Country
United States
Facility Name
Royal Prince Alfred Hospital
City
Camperdown
State/Province
New South Wales
ZIP/Postal Code
2050
Country
Australia
Facility Name
St George Hospital
City
Kogarah
State/Province
New South Wales
ZIP/Postal Code
2217
Country
Australia
Facility Name
Westmead Hospital
City
Westmead
State/Province
New South Wales
ZIP/Postal Code
2145
Country
Australia
Facility Name
Monash Medical Centre
City
Clayton
State/Province
Victoria
ZIP/Postal Code
3168
Country
Australia
Facility Name
Landeskrankenhaus Donauregion Tulln
City
Tulln
State/Province
Niederösterreich
ZIP/Postal Code
3430
Country
Austria
Facility Name
LNK Wagner Jauregg
City
Linz
State/Province
Oberösterreich
ZIP/Postal Code
4020
Country
Austria
Facility Name
Medizinische Universität Graz
City
Graz
State/Province
Steiermark
ZIP/Postal Code
8036
Country
Austria
Facility Name
Allgemeines Krankenhaus der Stadt Wien Universitätskliniken
City
Wien
ZIP/Postal Code
1090
Country
Austria
Facility Name
Fundación Instituto de Alta tecnología médica de Antioquia
City
Medellín
State/Province
Antioquia
Country
Colombia
Facility Name
Fundación Santa Fe de Bogotá - Hospital Universitario
City
Bogotá
State/Province
Cundinamarca
Country
Colombia
Facility Name
DIME Clinica Neurocardiovascular S.A.
City
Cali
State/Province
Valle del Cauca
Country
Colombia
Facility Name
Centro de Diagnostico Medico
City
Medellín
Country
Colombia
Facility Name
Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum
City
Heidelberg
State/Province
Baden-Württemberg
ZIP/Postal Code
69120
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Städtisches Klinikum Karlsruhe gGmbH
City
Karlsruhe
State/Province
Baden-Württemberg
ZIP/Postal Code
76133
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Klinikum Mannheim gGmbH
City
Mannheim
State/Province
Baden-Württemberg
ZIP/Postal Code
68167
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Zentralklinikum Augsburg
City
Augsburg
State/Province
Bayern
ZIP/Postal Code
865156
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätsklinikum Erlangen
City
Erlangen
State/Province
Bayern
ZIP/Postal Code
91054
Country
Germany
Facility Name
LMU Klinikum der Universität München - Großhadern
City
München
State/Province
Bayern
ZIP/Postal Code
81377
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Klinikum rechts der Isar
City
München
State/Province
Bayern
ZIP/Postal Code
81675
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Klinikum Ernst von Bergmann
City
Potsdam
State/Province
Brandenburg
ZIP/Postal Code
14467
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Krankenhaus Nordwest
City
Frankfurt
State/Province
Hessen
ZIP/Postal Code
60488
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Kliniken der Medizinischen Hochschule Hannover
City
Hannover
State/Province
Niedersachsen
ZIP/Postal Code
30625
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Medizinische Einrichtungen der Universität Bonn
City
Bonn
State/Province
Nordrhein-Westfalen
ZIP/Postal Code
53105
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Medizinisches Versorgungszentrum Prof. Dr. D. Uhlenbrock
City
Dortmund
State/Province
Nordrhein-Westfalen
ZIP/Postal Code
44263
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätsklinikum Köln
City
Köln
State/Province
Nordrhein-Westfalen
ZIP/Postal Code
50937
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätskliniken des Saarlandes
City
Homburg
State/Province
Saarland
ZIP/Postal Code
66424
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus
City
Dresden
State/Province
Sachsen
ZIP/Postal Code
01307
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätsklinikum Leipzig AöR
City
Leipzig
State/Province
Sachsen
ZIP/Postal Code
04103
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Klinikum der Christian-Albrechts-Universität
City
Kiel
State/Province
Schleswig-Holstein
ZIP/Postal Code
24105
Country
Germany
Facility Name
HELIOS Klinikum Erfurt GmbH
City
Erfurt
State/Province
Thüringen
ZIP/Postal Code
99089
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätsklinikum Charite zu Berlin
City
Berlin
ZIP/Postal Code
10117
Country
Germany
Facility Name
Universitätsklinikum Hamburg Eppendorf (UKE)
City
Hamburg
ZIP/Postal Code
20246
Country
Germany
Facility Name
CT /MRI centre
City
Indore
State/Province
Madhya Pradesh
ZIP/Postal Code
252002
Country
India
Facility Name
Piramal Diagnostic- Jankharia Imaging
City
Mumbai
State/Province
Maharashtra
ZIP/Postal Code
400004
Country
India
Facility Name
Sanjay Gandhi Post Graduate Institute of Medical Sciences
City
Lucknow
ZIP/Postal Code
226 014
Country
India
Facility Name
Bombay Hospital, Institute of Medical sciences
City
Mumbai
ZIP/Postal Code
400020
Country
India
Facility Name
Nagoya Kyoritsu Clinic
City
Nagoya
State/Province
Aichi
ZIP/Postal Code
454-0933
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Nagoya Kyoritsu Hospital
City
Nagoya
State/Province
Aichi
ZIP/Postal Code
454-0933
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Social Insurance Chukyo Hospital
City
Nagoya
State/Province
Aichi
ZIP/Postal Code
457-8510
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Himeji Medical Center
City
Himeji
State/Province
Hyogo
ZIP/Postal Code
670-8520
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Himeji Central Hospital
City
Himeji
State/Province
Hyogo
ZIP/Postal Code
672-8501
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Institute of Biomedical Research and Innovation
City
Kobe
State/Province
Hyogo
ZIP/Postal Code
650-0047
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Kobe City Medical Center General Hospital
City
Kobe
State/Province
Hyogo
ZIP/Postal Code
650-0047
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Shinsuma Hospital
City
Kobe
State/Province
Hyogo
ZIP/Postal Code
654-0047
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Kishiwada Tokushukai Hospital
City
Kishiwada
State/Province
Osaka
ZIP/Postal Code
596-8522
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Shimonoseki Kosei Hospital
City
Shimonoseki
State/Province
Yamaguchi
ZIP/Postal Code
750-0061
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Utano National Hospital
City
Kyoto
ZIP/Postal Code
616-8255
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Osaka Medical Center for Cancer and Cardiovascular Diseases
City
Osaka
ZIP/Postal Code
537-8511
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Osaka National Hospital
City
Osaka
ZIP/Postal Code
540-0006
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Osaka General Medical Center
City
Osaka
ZIP/Postal Code
558-8558
Country
Japan
Facility Name
Universitätsspital Basel
City
Basel
State/Province
Basel-Stadt
ZIP/Postal Code
4031
Country
Switzerland
Facility Name
Kantonsspital St. Gallen
City
St. Gallen
State/Province
Sankt Gallen
ZIP/Postal Code
9007
Country
Switzerland
Facility Name
Inselspital Bern
City
Bern
ZIP/Postal Code
3010
Country
Switzerland
Facility Name
Hôpital Cantonal Universitaire de Genève
City
Genève
ZIP/Postal Code
1211
Country
Switzerland
Facility Name
Luzerner Kantonsspital
City
Luzern
ZIP/Postal Code
6000
Country
Switzerland
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Links:
URL
http://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/
Description
Click here to find information about studies related to Bayer Healthcare products conducted in Europe
Learn more about this trial
Safety and Efficacy of Gadobutrol 1.0 Molar (Gadavist) in Patients for Central Nervous System (CNS) Imaging
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs