search
Back to results

Clinical Evaluation of CARESTREAM Dual Energy and Digital Tomosynthesis

Primary Purpose

Solitary Pulmonary Nodules

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Radiation
Sponsored by
Carestream Health, Inc.
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional diagnostic trial for Solitary Pulmonary Nodules focused on measuring pulmonary nodule

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

Age 18 years and older. Subject has provided informed consent. Study participant is scheduled to have a chest CT exam. Study participant is able to stand and be still during the exams.

Exclusion Criteria:

Human subject specific:

Not able or willing to provide Informed Consent, or consent is withdrawn. Study participant is a female of child bearing age.

Sites / Locations

    Arms of the Study

    Arm 1

    Arm 2

    Arm 3

    Arm Type

    Experimental

    Experimental

    Experimental

    Arm Label

    Predicate & Invest. DE - Human Subjects

    Predicate & Invest. DT - Human Subjects

    Predicate & Invest. DT - Phantom Images

    Arm Description

    Radiation -Thirty to forty (30-40) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector and a DE exam. Each DE patient exam includes high energy and low energy image exposures using the investigational device. These images are used by the DE console software to generate additional DE images (e.g. bone and soft tissue).

    Radiation - Fifteen to twenty (15-20) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector, and a DT exam. Each DT patient exam includes a scout image (chest PA) and a DT scan using the investigational DT SW. The DT scan is used by the DT console software to generate tomographic images.

    Radiation - Eleven (11) phantoms of various anatomy will be imaged with linear tomography (LT) as predicate and DT for investigational.

    Outcomes

    Primary Outcome Measures

    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Predicate PA Chest
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational Composite
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational High Energy
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational Low Energy
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Reference 1- PA Chest
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Reference 2 - PA and LAT Chest
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Investigational - Scout & DT Volume
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - LT Predicate Phantom Images
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Investigational Phantom Images
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.

    Secondary Outcome Measures

    Full Information

    First Posted
    August 20, 2015
    Last Updated
    January 27, 2017
    Sponsor
    Carestream Health, Inc.
    search

    1. Study Identification

    Unique Protocol Identification Number
    NCT02531646
    Brief Title
    Clinical Evaluation of CARESTREAM Dual Energy and Digital Tomosynthesis
    Official Title
    Clinical Evaluation of CARESTREAM Dual Energy and Digital Tomosynthesis
    Study Type
    Interventional

    2. Study Status

    Record Verification Date
    August 2015
    Overall Recruitment Status
    Completed
    Study Start Date
    November 2015 (undefined)
    Primary Completion Date
    April 2016 (Actual)
    Study Completion Date
    April 2016 (Actual)

    3. Sponsor/Collaborators

    Responsible Party, by Official Title
    Sponsor
    Name of the Sponsor
    Carestream Health, Inc.

    4. Oversight

    Data Monitoring Committee
    No

    5. Study Description

    Brief Summary
    The purpose of this study is to evaluate the imaging performance of Dual Energy and Digital Tomosynthesis (DE-DT) application against the commercially available predicate devices.
    Detailed Description
    The acquisition system will consist of using site equipment including the CARESTREAM DRX-Evolution x-ray system, and the predicate CARESTREAM DRX Plus detector and the investigational DE-DT application. DE Study Design Thirty to forty (30-40) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector and a DE exam. Each DE patient exam includes high energy and low energy image exposures using the investigational device. These images are used by the DE console software to generate additional DE images (e.g. bone and soft tissue). DT Study Design Fifteen to twenty (15-20) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector, and a DT exam. Each DT patient exam includes a scout image (chest PA) and a DT scan using the investigational DT SW. The DT scan is used by the DT console software to generate tomographic images. 11 phantoms of various anatomy will be imaged with linear tomography (LT) as predicate and DT for investigational.

    6. Conditions and Keywords

    Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
    Solitary Pulmonary Nodules
    Keywords
    pulmonary nodule

    7. Study Design

    Primary Purpose
    Diagnostic
    Study Phase
    Not Applicable
    Interventional Study Model
    Parallel Assignment
    Masking
    ParticipantOutcomes Assessor
    Allocation
    Randomized
    Enrollment
    66 (Actual)

    8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

    Arm Title
    Predicate & Invest. DE - Human Subjects
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Radiation -Thirty to forty (30-40) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector and a DE exam. Each DE patient exam includes high energy and low energy image exposures using the investigational device. These images are used by the DE console software to generate additional DE images (e.g. bone and soft tissue).
    Arm Title
    Predicate & Invest. DT - Human Subjects
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Radiation - Fifteen to twenty (15-20) patients will receive a DR standard of care chest exam using the DRX Plus detector, and a DT exam. Each DT patient exam includes a scout image (chest PA) and a DT scan using the investigational DT SW. The DT scan is used by the DT console software to generate tomographic images.
    Arm Title
    Predicate & Invest. DT - Phantom Images
    Arm Type
    Experimental
    Arm Description
    Radiation - Eleven (11) phantoms of various anatomy will be imaged with linear tomography (LT) as predicate and DT for investigational.
    Intervention Type
    Radiation
    Intervention Name(s)
    Radiation
    Intervention Description
    Radiation - Each human subject will receive one standard of care x-ray and one Duel Energy exposure or one standard of care x-ray and one Digital Tomosynthesis exposure. Phantoms were imaged using linear tomography and digital tomography.
    Primary Outcome Measure Information:
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Predicate PA Chest
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational Composite
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational High Energy
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DE Investigational Low Energy
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Reference 1- PA Chest
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Reference 2 - PA and LAT Chest
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Investigational - Scout & DT Volume
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 month
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - LT Predicate Phantom Images
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months
    Title
    Radlex Scale for Diagnostic Quality Ratings - DT Investigational Phantom Images
    Description
    1-1.9-Non-diagnostic Unacceptable for diagnostic purposes. Little or no clinically usable diagnostic information (e.g., gross underexposure, system failure or extensive motion artifact). Almost all such imaging should be repeated. 2-2.9-Limited Acceptable, with some technical defect (motion artifact, body habitus/poor x-ray penetration, or patient positioning may limit visualization of some body-regions but still adequate for diagnostic purposes). Not as much diagnostic information as is typical for an examination of this type, but likely sufficient. 3-3.9-Diagnostic Image quality that would be expected routinely when imaging cooperative patients. 4-Exemplary Good, most adequate for diagnostic purposes. Image quality that can serve as an example that should be emulated.
    Time Frame
    3 months

    10. Eligibility

    Sex
    All
    Minimum Age & Unit of Time
    18 Years
    Accepts Healthy Volunteers
    No
    Eligibility Criteria
    Inclusion Criteria: Age 18 years and older. Subject has provided informed consent. Study participant is scheduled to have a chest CT exam. Study participant is able to stand and be still during the exams. Exclusion Criteria: Human subject specific: Not able or willing to provide Informed Consent, or consent is withdrawn. Study participant is a female of child bearing age.
    Overall Study Officials:
    First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
    Narinder Paul, MD
    Organizational Affiliation
    Toronto General Hospital
    Official's Role
    Principal Investigator

    12. IPD Sharing Statement

    Plan to Share IPD
    No

    Learn more about this trial

    Clinical Evaluation of CARESTREAM Dual Energy and Digital Tomosynthesis

    We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs