ClinicalTrials.gg
Status unknownNCT03386916stasfaUpdated Dec 29, 2017

CT Scan Guide Percutaneous Biopsy of Lytic Bone Metastases of Lung Cancer : Contribution in Pathology Diagnosis and Molecular Biology

An observational study in Image-Guided Biopsy - Carcinoma, Bronchogenic / Diagnosis- Outpatients, sponsored by University Hospital, Grenoble. Status unknown. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2017-12-29.

Sponsored by University Hospital, Grenoble · Observational

The sponsor has not verified this record recently (last verified Dec 2017), so the status shown — last known as Active, not recruiting — may be out of date.

Help build ClinicalTrials.gg — short surveys, remote interviews or testing, in your language. Take part →

Study type
Observational
Model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
80
Sex
All
01

Study summary

In case of primary lung cancer, bone metastases biopsy can be done in initial diagnosis or follow-up.

Nevertheless, any study focus on rentability and biopsy complications of lytic bone lesion for the context of lung cancer.

This study aims to demonstrate that CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone lesion help to anatomopathologic diagnosis and molecular biology with a low complication rate inasmuch a lung cancer is suspected.

This study is observational, retrospective, one center

Read the detailed description

Current progress in thoracic oncology require to be able to carry out analysis by molecular biology. So biopsies are done several times during cancer progression. But risk is high for a lung biopsy with enough sample, so a CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone metastases of lung cancer can be an alternative.

In case of primary lung cancer, bone metastases biopsy can be done in initial diagnosis or follow-up. But this contribution in diagnostic (anatomopathologic an molecular biology) is poorly understood. It is demonstrated that to sample on lytic bone lesion have a failure rate lower than on calcified osseous lesion. Nevertheless, any study focus on rentability and biopsy complications of lytic bone lesion for the context of lung cancer.

this study aims to demonstrate that CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone lesion help to anatomopathologic diagnosis and molecular biology with a low complication rate inasmuch a lung cancer is suspected.

This study is observational, retrospective, descriptive, one-center Patient's records selection will be done by keyword search on the CHU Grenoble Alpes radiology software. Only records with bone biopsy register between January 2010 and June 2017 will be included.

02

Conditions studied

  • Image-Guided Biopsy - Carcinoma, Bronchogenic / Diagnosis- Outpatients

Keywords

  • Technology, Radiologic - Radiography, Interventional - Image-Guided Biopsy - Early Detection of Cancer - Carcinoma, Bronchogenic / diagnosis - Outpatients
03

In context

Carcinoma, Bronchogenic

66 studies on the registry are indexed under Carcinoma, Bronchogenic; 12 are open to participants now.

This study's enrollment of 80 is below the median of 300 across 15 observational studies indexed under Carcinoma, Bronchogenic.

Browse Carcinoma, Bronchogenic studies →

Lead sponsor

University Hospital, Grenoble is the lead sponsor of 838 studies on the registry; 208 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
Child (0–17), Adult (18–64), Older adult (65+)
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

Patients with CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone metastases of lung cancer

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • CT scan guide percutaneous of lytic bone
  • register on CHU Grenoble Alpes radiology software between January 2010 and June 2017
  • Patient who have a clinical context of lung cancer with bone metastases

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Person deprived of liberty by judicial order
  • Opposition expressed by patient
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(2)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Biopsy and archival tissue

A biopsy takes a small piece of tissue to examine. “Archival tissue” is a sample already taken, for example at diagnosis, and kept by the hospital.

Whether a stored sample will do depends on when it was taken, how much there is and what the study needs. Ask whether the study accepts your stored sample or needs a new biopsy.

Metastases

Cancer that has spread from where it began to other parts of the body. “Metastatic” cancer is cancer that has spread this way.

05

Study design

Observational model
Case-only
Time perspective
Retrospective
Enrollment
80 participants (actual)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • Patient with a CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone

    Patient with a CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone metastases register on CHU Grenoble Alpes radiology software between January 2010 and June 2017

    Procedure: CT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone metastases of lung cancer

Interventions

  • ProcedureCT scan guide percutaneous biopsy of lytic bone metastases of lung cancer
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Rentability of biopsy of lytic bone lesion in anatomopathologic analysis

    Rentability of biopsy of lytic bone lesion = 100x (number of sample wich analysed by anatomopathologic /total number of biopsy of lytic bone lesion done)

    Time frame: Analysis between january 2018-september 2018

Secondary outcomes

  1. Rentability of biopsy of lytic bone lesion in molecular biology analysis inas much non small cell epidermoid lung cancer is diagnosed

    Rentability of biopsy of lytic bone lesion in molecular biology analysis inas much non small cell epidermoid lung cancer is diagnosed - =100x (number of sample wich analysed by molecular biology /total number of biopsy of lytic bone lesion sent to molecular biology analysis)

    Time frame: Analysis between january 2018-september 2018

  2. Cell quality in sample of biopsy of lytic bone lesion in molecular biology analysis inas much non small cell epidermoid lung cancer is diagnosed

    Cell quality in sample of biopsy of lytic bone lesion in molecular biology analysis inas much non small cell epidermoid lung cancer is diagnosed * average percentage of tumour cells in samples

    Time frame: Analysis between january 2018-september 2018

  3. Complication rate linked to gesture of biopsy of lytic bone lesion

    Complication rate linked to gesture of biopsy of lytic bone lesion and descriptive analysis

    Time frame: Analysis between january 2018-september 2018

  4. Impact assessement of biopsy of lytic bone lesion on patient care

    Modification of management of lung cancer between before biopsy and after biopsy results

    Time frame: Analysis between january 2018-september 2018

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Jelinek JS, Murphey MD, Welker JA, Henshaw RM, Kransdorf MJ, Shmookler BM, Malawer MM. Diagnosis of primary bone tumors with image-guided percutaneous biopsy: experience with 110 tumors. Radiology. 2002 Jun;223(3):731-7. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2233011050. PubMed 12034942 ↗
  • Fraser-Hill MA, Renfrew DL. Percutaneous needle biopsy of musculoskeletal lesions. 1. Effective accuracy and diagnostic utility. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1992 Apr;158(4):809-12. doi: 10.2214/ajr.158.4.1546597. PubMed 1546597 ↗
  • Leffler SG, Chew FS. CT-guided percutaneous biopsy of sclerotic bone lesions: diagnostic yield and accuracy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999 May;172(5):1389-92. doi: 10.2214/ajr.172.5.10227522. PubMed 10227522 ↗
  • Vieillard MH, Boutry N, Chastanet P, Duquesnoy B, Cotten A, Cortet B. Contribution of percutaneous biopsy to the definite diagnosis in patients with suspected bone tumor. Joint Bone Spine. 2005 Jan;72(1):53-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jbspin.2004.03.008. PubMed 15681249 ↗
  • Vanderlaan PA, Yamaguchi N, Folch E, Boucher DH, Kent MS, Gangadharan SP, Majid A, Goldstein MA, Huberman MS, Kocher ON, Costa DB. Success and failure rates of tumor genotyping techniques in routine pathological samples with non-small-cell lung cancer. Lung Cancer. 2014 Apr;84(1):39-44. doi: 10.1016/j.lungcan.2014.01.013. Epub 2014 Jan 28. PubMed 24513263 ↗
09

Timeline

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
ElapsedEstimatedEstimated, not yet reached

Ran from Jan 2010 to primary completion in Jun 2017, 89 months.

How these figures are worked out, and which studies are left out of them.

Registered
Dec 12, 2017
First posted
Dec 29, 2017
StartActual
Jan 2010
Primary completionActual
Jun 2017
CompletionEst.
Sep 2018
Last update
Dec 29, 2017
What these dates mean
Start.
When the first participant enrolled; while estimated, when the study expects to open to recruitment.
Primary completion.
When the last participant was examined or treated to collect data for the study's main question, its primary outcome. A study that stopped early gives the date its data collection stopped.
Completion.
When the last participant's last visit took place, for every outcome, secondary ones and side effects included: the end of the study. Often later than primary completion, sometimes the same day.
Actual and Est.
Actual means the registry says the date has happened. Est. (estimated) is a date the sponsor plans or expects. It can still move, and the sponsor is expected to change it to actual once it has passed.
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Dec 29, 2017, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT03386916
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Dec 29, 2017
Start date
Jan 2010
Primary completion
Jun 2017
Completion
Sep 2018 (estimated)
Last update
Dec 29, 2017

Study contacts

Gilbert FERRETTI
study director · UniversityHospital Grenoble

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is status unknown, as verified in Dec 2017. 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.

Sign in to follow

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.

Start the discussion