CompletedNCT02638935Updated Apr 10, 2020

Evaluation of Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification (VTIQ - 2D-SWE) in the Assessment of BI-RADS® 3 and 4 Lesions

An interventional study of Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification in Breast Neoplasms, sponsored by Heidelberg University. Completed at 11 sites in 6 countries. Open to female participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2020-04-10.

Sponsored by Heidelberg University · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

From the registry’s dates

Primary completion was Mar 2019, 7 years 7 months ago, and no results have been posted to the registry.

Phase: Not applicable
Study type: Interventional
Enrollment: 1,304
Allocation: Non-randomized
Ages: 18 Years and older
Sex: Female

Study summary

The primary aim of this study is to evaluate if VTIQ in addition to BI-RADS® categorization can improve the diagnostic accuracy with respect to detection of malignancies, in particular for BI-RADS® categories 3 and 4a. The idea of the study is to restage all patients in categories 3 and 4a according to a predefined VTIQ cut-off value of ≥ 3.5 m/s (37 kPa).

Read the detailed description

Elastography is a method of imaging tissue stiffness. It is based on shear wave velocity information that can be mapped to create an image of the stiffness in the region of interest.

Sonoelastography is used to differentiate benign from malignant lesions since malignant lesions alter tissue elasticity.

Adding Shear Wave elastographic features to BI-RADS® feature analysis- especially in lesions scored BI-RADS® 3 and 4a- improved specificity of breast US mass assessment without loss of sensitivity.

The BI-RADS® categories are defined by the risk for a malignant lesion varying from benign BI-RADS® 2 lesions, up to a 2% malignancy rate in BI-RADS® 3 and 2- 95% in BI-RADS® 4 (4a 2-10%; 4b 10-50%; 4c 50-95%). Based on these probabilities, biopsies are recommended for BI-RADS® 4 and 5 lesions and short-term follow-up examinations for BI-RADS® 3. Consequently, up to 2% of the in Ultrasound visible breast cancers are not directly detected as such and put into the BI-RADS® 3 category. In contrast, in the BI-RADS® 4a category more than 90% of the biopsies are unnecessary.

The main aim of the confirmatory study is to use Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification in order to reduce unnecessary benign biopsies without a reduction of the number of detected cancers.

This multi-center study is planned to involve 12 sites in 7 countries. Recruitment started at the first sites in February 2016. Recruitment takes place in the course of the patient's routine visit at a certified breast unit. All study participants will receive VTIQ in addition to standard ultrasound.

Enrollment goal is a total of 1000 cases, split into groups of a minimum of n= 300 BI-RADS® 3, n= 400 BI-RADS® 4a, n= 100 BI-RADS® 4b, n= 100 BI-RADS® 4c. All patients will be documented in a screening list. Monitoring will be performed by the Coordination Center for Clinical Trials (KKS Heidelberg). Completeness, validity and plausibility of data will be checked in time of data entry (edit-checks) and using validating programs, which will generate queries. The investigator or the designated representatives are obliged to clarify or explain the queries. If no further corrections are to be made in the database it will be closed and used for statistical analysis. All data management procedures will be carried out on validated systems and according to the current Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) of the Institute of Medical Biometry and Informatics.

The standard BI-RADS® Ultrasound (US) category (BI-RADS® 3-4c) and VTIQ values will be correlated with the histological result. Additionally, local (BI-RADS® given at each site) and central expert BI-RADS® assessment will be compared (BI-RADS® assessment and assessment of the variables leading to the BI-RADS® value separately) to assess the inter-rater reliability. In addition, the BI-RADS® assessments will be compared with the histological results.

The variable "measurement lesion (in m/s)" is derived from three VTIQ measurements as follows:

I. For confirmatory analysis of primary objectives an algorithm was established,

using the first measurement for analysis if the value is smaller than 2.5 m/s or if the value is larger than 4.5 m/s. If the first measurement is smaller than 2.5 m/s, the lesion can be considered benign and no further diagnostics is needed. If the lesion is larger than 4.5 m/s the lesion should be considered suspicious and further diagnostics is required.
requiring two additional measurements (in total three measurements) if the first measurement is in the range of ≥ 2.5 m/s to ≤ 4.5 m/s. In this case the average of all three measurements is used for analysis.

II. For descriptive analysis other options for derivation of this variable from the three VTIQ measurements will be calculated for discussion:

First measurement only
Average of all three measurements
Median of all three measurements
Maximum of all three measurements

In conjunction with the maximum VTIQ shear wave velocity the quality display will be used to aid in the classification of lesions as malignant or benign as follows:

If the shear wave velocity ≥ the cut-off value (3.5 m/s), the lesion is considered potentially malignant, regardless of the outcome of the quality factor
If a lesion or lesion rim has a completely high quality factor (all green) and a shear wave velocity \< the cut-off value (3.5 m/s), the lesion is considered benign.
If a lesion or lesion rim has mixed high and low quality factors (there are areas with low quality within the mass) and the only area of high quality (green) has a shear wave velocity \< the cut-off value (3.5 m/s), then the lesion is indeterminate and malignancy cannot be excluded.

Conditions studied

Breast Neoplasms

Browse trials for

Breast Neoplasms 12,544

Keywords

Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging
VTIQ
Elastography
Breast Cancer
BI-RADS
Differentiation of breast lesions
Breast Lesion

In context

Breast Neoplasms

12,544 studies on the registry are indexed under Breast Neoplasms; 2,892 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 1,304 is above the median of 72 across 9,303 interventional studies indexed under Breast Neoplasms.

Browse Breast Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Heidelberg University is the lead sponsor of 279 studies on the registry; 17 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

Who can participate

Ages eligible: 18 Years and older
Sexes eligible: Female
Accepts healthy volunteers: No

Inclusion criteria

Female
Age ≥18 years
Patients with a lesion ≥ 0.5 cm in largest diameter size, initially scored BI-RADS® 3, 4a, 4b or 4c in B-mode ultrasound
Informed consent about histological examination (core cut biopsy (CCB), vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB), fine needle aspiration (FNA) or surgery) has already been given in the course of clinical routine
Signed informed consent of study participation

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

Pregnant or lactating women
Women with breast implants on the same side as the lesion
Women that underwent local radiation or chemotherapy within the last 12 months
Women with history of breast cancer or breast surgery in the same quadrant
Lesions in or close to scar tissue (\< 1cm)
Skin lesions or lesions that have been biopsied previously
Lesion larger than 4 cm in the longest dimension
No lesion should be included when more than 50% of the lesion is further down than 4 cm beneath the skin level.

Study design

Phase: Not applicable
Primary purpose: Diagnostic
Allocation: Non-randomized
Intervention model: Single group
Masking: Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment: 1,304 participants (actual)

Study arms

Other
BI-RADS 3
Intervention: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Device: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Other
BI-RADS 4a
Intervention: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Device: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Other
BI-RADS 4b
Intervention: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Device: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Other
BI-RADS 4c
Intervention: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Device: Ultrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification

Interventions

DeviceUltrasound- Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification
Siemens Medical Solutions USA, Inc. (Mountain View, CA) has implemented Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification (VTIQ) technology on a commercially available general purpose US imaging system (trade name: Acuson S2000 or S3000). This system has received clearance under Food and Drug Administration (FDA) 510(k) number K072786 (S3000) and K130881 (VTIQ). The technology uses a set of tailored US pulses (Acoustic Radiation Force Impulse, ARFI) to induce shear waves in breast tissue due to tissue displacement. A set of standard B-mode pulses detect the perpendicular shear waves. The displacement signals can be processed using algorithms on a Virtual Touch IQ-equipped system in order to calculate the shear wave velocity.
Also known as: Elasticity Imaging, VTIQ, Elastography, Ultrasound, ARFI

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

Standard chi-square test at a two-sided significance level of 5% to test the diagnostic accuracy of Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification (VTIQ) in the differentiation of BI-RADS® 3 and 4a lesions
Hierarchical testing of the main statistical hypotheses H0_1, H0_2, H0_3 (test for H0_1 defines a gatekeeper) to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of VTIQ in the differentiation of BI-RADS® 3 and 4a lesions: H0_1: The proportion of malignancies for group A (BI-RADS 4a, VTIQ ≥ cut-off) is less or equal to the proportion of malignancies for group B (BI-RADS 4a, VTIQ \< cut-off). versus H1_1: The proportion of malignancies for group A is higher than the proportion of malignancies for group B.
Time frame: 2 years
Standard Binomial-test according to Bonferroni-Holm to test the null hypothesis H0_2
H0_2: The proportion of malignancies for group B (BI-RADS 4a, VTIQ \< cut-off) is larger than or equal to 2%. versus H1_2: The proportion of malignancies for group B is smaller than 2%.
Time frame: 2 years
Standard Binomial-test according to Bonferroni-Holm to test the null hypothesis H0_3
H0_3: The proportion of malignancies for group D (BI-RADS 3, VTIQ \< cut-off) is larger than or equal to 2%. versus H1_3: The proportion of malignancies for group D is smaller than 2%.
Time frame: 2 years

Secondary outcomes

Corresponding chi-square tests for descriptive analysis of Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification (VTIQ) in the assessment of BI-RADS® 3, 4b, 4c lesions
Equivalent hypotheses as given for primary outcome measures can be formulated for the patients finally staged as BI-RADS® 3, 4b and 4c. These hypotheses will be analyzed with corresponding chi-square tests, where the resulting p-values are only interpreted descriptively: To assess whether ultrasonically visualized breast lesions, categorized as BI-RADS® 3/ 4b/ 4c with a VTIQ-measured shear velocity value of smaller than 3.5 m/s (37 kPa), show a lower malignancy rate than BI-RADS® 3/ 4b/ 4c with a VTIQ-measured shear velocity value of larger than or equal to 3.5 m/s (37 kPa).
Time frame: 2 years
BI-RADS® vs. BI-RADS® + Virtual Touch Tissue Imaging Quantification (VTIQ)
Two logistic regression models including including BI-RADS® or BI-RADS® and VTIQ will be compared to test whether the probabilities for malignancies predicted with ultrasonically visualized breast lesions categorized as BI-RADS® differ from the probabilities for malignancies predicted with ultrasonically visualized breast lesions categorized as BI-RADS® and VTIQ-measured shear velocity.
Time frame: 2 years
Corresponding chi-square tests for descriptive analysis of the strain ratio in the differentiation of BI-RADS® 3, 4a, 4b or 4c lesions
Equivalent hypotheses as given in H0_1 vs H1_1 can be formulated for the patients initially staged as BI-RADS® 3, 4b and 4c. These hypotheses will be analyzed with corresponding chi-square tests, where the resulting p-values are only interpreted descriptively to test whether for women with ultrasonically visualized breast lesions categorized as BI-RADS® 3, 4a, 4b or 4c respectively, the subgroup of women with a strain ratio smaller than or equal to 1 shows a lower malignancy rate than the subgroup of women with a strain ratio of larger than 1.
Time frame: 2 years
Robust regression models to test the INTRA-RATER reliability for the original continuous scale
Robust regression models (Passing-Bablok-regression, orthogonal regression) and Bland-Altman Plots will be used for pairwise comparison of the continuous values between raters, where a slope of 1 and an intercept of 0 indicates agreement.
Time frame: 2 years
Cohens's Kappa to test the INTRA-RATER reliability for the dichotomized values
Time frame: 2 years
Robust regression models to test the INTER-RATER reliability for the original continuous scale
Robust regression models (Passing-Bablok-regression, orthogonal regression) and Bland-Altman Plots will be used for pairwise comparison of the continuous values between raters, where a slope of 1 and an intercept of 0 indicates agreement.
Time frame: 2 years
Cohens's Kappa to test the INTER-RATER reliability for the dichotomized values
Time frame: 2 years
Descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value
Thereby the following factors will be examined: Subject-related factors: * Skin - breast lesion surface depth (cm) * Quality factor (color coded scale) within the lesion * Breast density/ Tissue composition (homogeneous background texture fat, homogeneous background texture fibroglandular, heterogeneous background texture) * Lesion size in B-mode (cm) * Normal fatty tissue shear wave velocity (Ratio between measurement in the fatty tissue and in the lesion) * Pathology (fibroadenoma, lipoma, atypia, cyst condense, "non special type" (NST), invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), invasive tubular carcinoma (ITC), carcinoma with medullary features, papillary cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), others) * Grading (G1, G2, G3, Gx) * Immunohistology (estrogen receptor (ER) status positive/ negative, progesterone receptor (PgR) status positive/ negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2-neu) status positive/ negative, Ki-67 status (%))
Time frame: 2 years
Skin to breast lesion surface depth (cm)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the skin - breast lesion surface depth (cm).
Time frame: 2 years
Quality factor within the lesion assessed using a color coded scale
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the Quality factor (color coded scale) within the lesion.
Time frame: 2 years
Breast density/ tissue composition assessed using the morphologic characteristics on US (homogeneous background texture fat, homogeneous background texture fibroglandular, heterogeneous background texture)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the breast density/ tissue composition (homogeneous background texture fat, homogeneous background texture fibroglandular, heterogeneous background texture).
Time frame: 2 years
Lesion size in B-mode Ultrasound (in cm)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the lesion size in B-mode (cm).
Time frame: 2 years
Normal fatty tissue shear wave velocity (ratio between measurement in the fatty tissue and in the lesion)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the normal fatty tissue shear wave velocity (ratio between measurement in the fatty tissue and in the lesion).
Time frame: 2 years
Pathology (fibroadenoma, lipoma, atypia, cyst condense, "non special type" (NST), invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), invasive tubular carcinoma (ITC), carcinoma with medullary features, papillary cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), others)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the pathology (fibroadenoma, lipoma, atypia, cyst condense, "non special type" (NST), invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), invasive tubular carcinoma (ITC), carcinoma with medullary features, papillary cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), others).
Time frame: 2 years
Grading (G1, G2, G3, Gx)
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the grading (G1, G2, G3, Gx).
Time frame: 2 years
Immunohistology (estrogen receptor (ER) status positive/ negative, progesterone receptor (PgR) status positive/ negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2-neu) status positive/ negative, Ki-67 status (%))
For descriptive analysis of predictive factors of the continuous VTIQ-value, different univariable und multivariable linear regression models will be evaluated and compared. Thereby one factor to be examined is the immunohistology (estrogen receptor (ER) status positive/ negative, progesterone receptor (PgR) status positive/ negative, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2-neu) status positive/ negative, Ki-67 status (%)).
Time frame: 2 years
Cohens's Kappa to determine the inter-rater reliability of BI-RADS® Assessment (local vs. central assessment)
Local (BI-RADS® given at each site) and central expert BI-RADS® assessment will be compared (BI-RADS® assessment and assessment of the variables leading to the BI-RADS® value separately). To test the inter-rater reliability of BI-RADS® Assessment Cohens' Kappa will be calculated.
Time frame: 2 years
Interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) values to determine the inter-rater reliability of BI-RADS® Assessment (local vs. central assessment)
Local (BI-RADS® given at each site) and central expert BI-RADS® assessment will be compared (BI-RADS® assessment and assessment of the variables leading to the BI-RADS® value separately). To test the inter-rater reliability of BI-RADS® Assessment ICC values will be calculated.
Time frame: 2 years
BI-RADS® vs. histological results
To compare the BI-RADS® assessments with the histological results, the malignancy rates will be computed separately for each BI-RADS® value. It will then be checked whether these rates lie within the given intervals. Furthermore, the likelihood of malignancy estimated by the experts will be examined using receiver operating curve (ROC) and area under the curve (AUC).
Time frame: 2 years
Chi-square test to examine whether the cut-off value of ≥ 3.5 m/s (37kPa) might be increased by increasing the cut-off value step-by-step by a small amount and repeat the primary analysis
We will increase the cut-off value step-by-step by a small amount and repeat the primary analysis (using a chi-square test). We stop the testing procedure as soon as the p-value is above the significance level (0.05). This analysis is, obviously, only an explorative one and has no confirmatory value.
Time frame: 2 years

Study locations

11 sites

Radiology Consultants, Inc.
Youngstown, Ohio 44512, United States
Institut Gustave Roussy, Service de Radiologie, Villejuif Cedex
Villejuif, France
Franziskus Hospital
Bielefeld, 33615, Germany
Universitätsmedizin Greifswald, Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe
Greifswald, 17475, Germany
University of Heidelberg
Heidelberg, 69120, Germany
Universitätsklinikum Marburg, Klinik für Gynäkologie, gyn. Endokrinologie und Onkologie Senologische Diagnostik & Gynäkologischer Ultraschall
Marburg, 35033, Germany
LMU Klinikum der Universität München
München, 81377, Germany
Universitätsklinikum Tübingen
Tubingen, 72076, Germany
Sagara Hospital
Kagoshima, Matsubaracho, Kagoshima-shi, Japan
Jeroen Bosch Hospital
's-Hertogenbosch, GZ5223, Netherlands
Centro Hospitalar e Universitário de Coimbra, Departamento de Radiologia
Coimbra, 3000-075, Portugal

References and documents

Publications

Barr RG, Zhang Z. Shear-wave elastography of the breast: value of a quality measure and comparison with strain elastography. Radiology. 2015 Apr;275(1):45-53. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132404. Epub 2014 Nov 24. PubMed 25426770 ↗
Barr RG, Zhang Z. Effects of precompression on elasticity imaging of the breast: development of a clinically useful semiquantitative method of precompression assessment. J Ultrasound Med. 2012 Jun;31(6):895-902. doi: 10.7863/jum.2012.31.6.895. PubMed 22644686 ↗
Golatta M, Schweitzer-Martin M, Harcos A, Schott S, Junkermann H, Rauch G, Sohn C, Heil J. Normal breast tissue stiffness measured by a new ultrasound technique: virtual touch tissue imaging quantification (VTIQ). Eur J Radiol. 2013 Nov;82(11):e676-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2013.06.029. Epub 2013 Aug 8. PubMed 23932637 ↗
Golatta M, Schweitzer-Martin M, Harcos A, Schott S, Gomez C, Stieber A, Rauch G, Domschke C, Rom J, Schutz F, Sohn C, Heil J. Evaluation of virtual touch tissue imaging quantification, a new shear wave velocity imaging method, for breast lesion assessment by ultrasound. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:960262. doi: 10.1155/2014/960262. Epub 2014 Mar 31. PubMed 24800257 ↗
Tozaki M, Saito M, Benson J, Fan L, Isobe S. Shear wave velocity measurements for differential diagnosis of solid breast masses: a comparison between virtual touch quantification and virtual touch IQ. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2013 Dec;39(12):2233-45. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2013.07.012. Epub 2013 Sep 21. PubMed 24063961 ↗
Barr RG, Nakashima K, Amy D, Cosgrove D, Farrokh A, Schafer F, Bamber JC, Castera L, Choi BI, Chou YH, Dietrich CF, Ding H, Ferraioli G, Filice C, Friedrich-Rust M, Hall TJ, Nightingale KR, Palmeri ML, Shiina T, Suzuki S, Sporea I, Wilson S, Kudo M. WFUMB guidelines and recommendations for clinical use of ultrasound elastography: Part 2: breast. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2015 May;41(5):1148-60. doi: 10.1016/j.ultrasmedbio.2015.03.008. Epub 2015 Mar 18. PubMed 25795620 ↗
Cosgrove DO, Berg WA, Dore CJ, Skyba DM, Henry JP, Gay J, Cohen-Bacrie C; BE1 Study Group. Shear wave elastography for breast masses is highly reproducible. Eur Radiol. 2012 May;22(5):1023-32. doi: 10.1007/s00330-011-2340-y. Epub 2011 Dec 31. PubMed 22210408 ↗
Balleyguier C, Canale S, Ben Hassen W, Vielh P, Bayou EH, Mathieu MC, Uzan C, Bourgier C, Dromain C. Breast elasticity: principles, technique, results: an update and overview of commercially available software. Eur J Radiol. 2013 Mar;82(3):427-34. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2012.03.001. Epub 2012 Mar 24. PubMed 22445593 ↗
Barr RG, Destounis S, Lackey LB 2nd, Svensson WE, Balleyguier C, Smith C. Evaluation of breast lesions using sonographic elasticity imaging: a multicenter trial. J Ultrasound Med. 2012 Feb;31(2):281-7. doi: 10.7863/jum.2012.31.2.281. PubMed 22298872 ↗
Barr RG. Sonographic breast elastography: a primer. J Ultrasound Med. 2012 May;31(5):773-83. doi: 10.7863/jum.2012.31.5.773. PubMed 22535725 ↗
Evans A, Whelehan P, Thomson K, Brauer K, Jordan L, Purdie C, McLean D, Baker L, Vinnicombe S, Thompson A. Differentiating benign from malignant solid breast masses: value of shear wave elastography according to lesion stiffness combined with greyscale ultrasound according to BI-RADS classification. Br J Cancer. 2012 Jul 10;107(2):224-9. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.253. Epub 2012 Jun 12. PubMed 22691969 ↗
Golatta M, Pfob A, Busch C, Bruckner T, Alwafai Z, Balleyguier C, Clevert DA, Duda V, Goncalo M, Gruber I, Hahn M, Kapetas P, Ohlinger R, Rutten M, Togawa R, Tozaki M, Wojcinski S, Rauch G, Heil J, Barr RG. The potential of combined shear wave and strain elastography to reduce unnecessary biopsies in breast cancer diagnostics - An international, multicentre trial. Eur J Cancer. 2022 Jan;161:1-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2021.11.005. Epub 2021 Dec 5. PubMed 34879299 ↗

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026

No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 10, 2020, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Registry details

Key details

Study ID: NCT02638935
Lead sponsor: Heidelberg University
Collaborators: Siemens Medical Solutions
Responsible party: Michael Golatta (PD Dr. med., Heidelberg University) — Principal investigator
First posted: Dec 23, 2015
Start date: Feb 2016
Primary completion: Mar 2019
Completion: Mar 2019
Last update: Apr 10, 2020

Study contacts

Michael Golatta, PD Dr. med., MHBA

principal investigator · University of Heidelberg, Department of Gynecology, Breast Unit

Oversight

Data monitoring committee: Yes
FDA-regulated drug: No
FDA-regulated device: Yes

View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is completed, as verified in Apr 2020. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Other studies in this condition

Breast Neoplasms→

Other studies from this sponsor

Heidelberg University

Start the discussion