Skip to content

Screening for Occult Malignancy in Patients With Unprovoked Venous Thromboembolism

Screening for Occult Malignancy Using 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography/Computed Tomography (FDG PET/CT) in Patients With Unprovoked Venous Thromboembolism

Status
Active, not recruiting
Phases
Unknown
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT04304651
Acronym
MVTEP2/SOME2
Enrollment
1276
Registered
2020-03-11
Start date
2020-09-08
Completion date
2030-09-08
Last updated
2026-06-16

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

Conditions

Embolism and Thrombosis

Keywords

venous thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, screening, occult cancer

Brief summary

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can be the earliest sign of cancer. Identifying occult cancers at the time of VTE diagnosis may lead to significant improvement of patients' care. This is also an upmost issue for patients who want to know if an underlying cancer might have triggered the VTE. An individual patient-level data meta-analysis (IPDMA) supports extensive screening strategies for occult cancer especially based on FDG PET/CT, and suggests that the best target population for cancer screening would be patients with unprovoked VTE older than 50 years of age (6.7% in patients aged 50 years or more vs. 1.0% in patients of less than 50 years (OR: 7.1, 95% CI: 3.1 to 16%).

Detailed description

The identification of subgroups of patients at high risk of cancer might enable more efficient screening strategies for early detection of cancer. Venous thromboembolism (VTE) can be the first manifestation of an occult cancer. All tumor sites may be involved. In an individual patient-level data meta-analysis (IPDMA), it was reported a 1-year prevalence of occult cancer of 5.2% (95%CI 4.1-6.5) among patients presenting with unprovoked VTE. Two recent multicenter randomized controlled trials (e.g. SOME (Canada) and MVTEP (France) trials) failed to demonstrate that extensive cancer screening strategies diagnosed more cancers, more early stage tumors, or improved cancer-related mortality in comparison with a more limited screening strategy. However, the main limitation of these studies was the twice lower than expected overall incidence of occult cancer diagnosis in unselected patients with unprovoked VTE, which limited the statistical power. In the IPDMA, it was also reported that the 1-year period prevalence of occult cancer was 7-fold higher in patients aged ≥ 50 (6.8%; 95%CI 5.6-8.3) as compared with those \< 50 years (1.0%; 95%CI 0.5-2.3). Moreover, in the MVTEP trial, the incidence of missed cancers over a 2-years follow-up period was significantly lower in patients randomized to a 18F-Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission/Computed Tomography (FDG-PET/CT) screening strategy. Thus, the most promising diagnostic modality for occult cancer screening seems to be FDG-PET/CT. FDG-PET/CT which allows a one-stop whole-body imaging, is routinely used for the diagnosis, staging and restaging of various cancers. The MVTEP2 Trial seeks to determine if among higher risk patients (≥ 50 year-old) with a first unprovoked VTE, a cancer screening strategy including a FDG-PET/CT decreases the number of missed occult cancers detected over a 1-year follow-up period as compared with a limited screening alone.

Interventions

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTLimited cancer screening

The limited cancer screening will include: 1) a complete medical history and physical examination; 2) complete blood count; 3) liver function tests (AST, ALT, ALP, bilirubin); and 4) chest X-ray. In women, a breast examination, Pap smear/pelvic examination (if \< 70 years old and previously sexually active) and mammogram will be performed, if not conducted in last year. In men, similarly, prostate examination and PSA testing will be performed, if not conducted in the last year. All patients will undergo colon cancer screening as per local practice.

DIAGNOSTIC_TESTLimited cancer screening + FDG PET/CT

The limited cancer screening (as described above) in combination with a FDG PET/CT.

Sponsors

University Hospital, Brest
Lead SponsorOTHER
Ministry of Health, France
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV
Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR)
CollaboratorOTHER_GOV
Ottawa Hospital Research Institute
CollaboratorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
SCREENING
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
50 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

Patients aged 50 years or older with a new diagnosis of first unprovoked proximal deep vein thrombosis (DVT) and/or pulmonary embolism (PE) will be eligible to participate into the study. Unprovoked VTE is defined as the absence of any of the following predisposing factors: 1. active malignancy (known malignancy, progressive and/or treated during the last 5 years) except for adequately treated basal or squamous cell carcinoma; Patients whose state of health suggests the presence of cancer at the time of diagnosis of VTE cannot be included in the protocol 2. recent (less than 3 months) paralysis, paresis or plaster immobilization of the lower extremities; 3. recently bedridden for period of 3 or more days, or major surgery, within the previous 12 weeks requiring general or regional anaesthesia; 4. previous unprovoked VTE; 5. known thrombophilia (hereditary or acquired)

Exclusion criteria

Patients will be excluded from the study if they have any of the following criteria: 1. Refusal or inability to provide informed consent; 2. Hypersensitivity to 18F-FDG or any of the excipients according to the product monograph; 3. Unavailable to follow-up. 4. VTE while on anticoagulation (e.g apixaban, rivaroxaban, edoxaban, dabigatran, warfarin)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Occult cancer missed by screening strategiesAt 1 year of follow-upOccult cancer "missed" by cancer screening defined as proven cancer diagnosed (either biopsy proven cancer or cancer diagnosis approved by adjudication committee in the absence of biopsy proven cancer) from the time of cancer screening completion to the end of the 1-year follow-up period, and not detected at the time of screening. In other words, "missed" means the number of new cancers diagnosed in patients considered not to have cancer after having completed the assigned cancer screening strategy (i.e false negative results of screening strategies).

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Occult cancer diagnosed by screening strategiesAt 1 monthThe proportion of patients with a new cancer diagnosis after completion of the initial allocated screening strategy.
Early vs Adanced-stage cancersAt 1 year of follow-upThe proportion of early-stage (T1-2N0M0) as per the World Health Organization TNM classification system) versus advanced-stage tumors at initial screening and during follow-up.
Cancer-related mortalityAt 5 years of follow-upCancer-related mortality during a 5-year follow-up period.
Cost effectiveness analysisAt 1 year of follow-upAdditional cost per additional cancer detected.
Recurrent VTEAt 1 year of follow-upRate of recurrent VTE
Decision aid to assist patients in the decision of cancer screeningAt 1 year of follow-upDevelopment of a decision aid to assist patients in the decision of cancer screening
Additional testsAt 1 year of follow-upThe proportion of patients receiving additional tests following each strategy

Countries

Canada, France

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Jun 17, 2026