Skip to content

PET/MR Versus CECT Scans in Imaging Patients With Ovarian Cancer or Highly Suspected Ovarian Cancer

Comparing Accuracy of PET/MR vs. CECT in Assessment of Peritoneal Disease for Resectability in Patients With Ovarian Cancer or Highly Suspected Ovarian Cancer

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03965481
Enrollment
21
Registered
2019-05-29
Start date
2018-05-12
Completion date
2027-04-30
Last updated
2026-04-15

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Malignant Ovarian Neoplasm, Ovarian Carcinoma

Brief summary

This trial studies how well positron emission tomography/magnetic resonance (PET/MR) versus contrast enhanced computerized tomography (CECT) scans work in locating ovarian cancer tumors in patients with known or suspected ovarian cancer. PET, MR, and CECT scans use different methods to create images of areas inside the body. This trial is being done to see if PET/MR scans may help doctors locate ovarian cancer tumors, predict how well these tumors may be removed during surgery, and predict how patients respond to platinum-based chemotherapies compared to standard of care CECT scans.

Detailed description

PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To compare PET/MR and contrast enhanced computed tomography (CT) to determine the accuracy in patients with advanced-stage serous ovarian cancer or highly suspected ovarian cancer using diagnostic laparoscopy as the gold standard with respect to lesion detection. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES (EXPLORATORY): I. Correlating imaging findings such as enhancement pattern, apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) values, standardized uptake value (SUV) values, and advanced image analytics such as texture with pathology and genomic analysis for those lesions evaluated as a discovery arm. II. Assess whether MR (multiparametric and functional) and PET findings predict response to platinum based chemotherapy. III. To compare PET/MR and contrast enhanced CT to predict tumor negative (R0) resection using surgery as the gold standard. OUTLINE: Patients undergo standard of care CECT scan and PET-MRI scan over 90-120 minutes within 30 days before laparoscopy or cytoreduction. Patients who do not undergo cytoreduction based on diagnostic laparoscopy undergo additional PET-MRI and standard of care CECT scans after completion of chemotherapy and before cytoreduction.

Interventions

RADIATIONDynamic Enhanced CT

Undergo standard CECT

PROCEDUREMagnetic Resonance Imaging

Undergo PET/MRI scan

PROCEDUREPositron Emission Tomography

Undergo PET/MRI scan

Sponsors

M.D. Anderson Cancer Center
Lead SponsorOTHER
National Cancer Institute (NCI)
CollaboratorNIH

Study design

Allocation
NA
Intervention model
SINGLE_GROUP
Primary purpose
DIAGNOSTIC
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* Patients with ovarian cancer or highly suspected ovarian cancer who are eligible to undergo laparoscopic evaluation for resectability will be enrolled in the trial. * Patients who have estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) \> 30.

Exclusion criteria

* Patients allergic to gadolinium. * Patients who have eGRF \< 30. * Patients with cardiac pacers. * Pediatric patients. * Greater than 400 pounds in weight. * Blood glucose (\> 200 mg/dl). * Pregnant women.

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Lesion detection accuracyUp to 3 yearsLesion detection accuracy will be summarized using frequencies and percentages by modality. McNemar's test will be used to compare accuracies between positron emission tomography (PET)/magnetic resonance (MR) and contrast enhanced computerized tomography (CECT). Other diagnostic metrics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value) will be estimated along with 95% confidence intervals. Logistic regression model will be used to assess effect of patient and tumor characteristics on diagnostic accuracy.

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Diagnostic accuracy by locationUp to 3 yearsWill be analyzed using linear regression or generalized linear regression models where applicable.
Response statusUp to 3 yearsWill be analyzed using linear regression or generalized linear regression models where applicable.
Imaging and genomic data analysisUp to 3 yearsCorrelation between imaging and genomic data will be analyzed using linear regression or generalized linear regression models where applicable.

Countries

United States

Contacts

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATORPriya R Bhosale

M.D. Anderson Cancer Center

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Apr 16, 2026