ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07012694Updated Jul 1, 2025

22G-Adapt vs 22G-Franseen Needle Biopsy in EUS-Guided Tissue Acquisition of Solid Lesions

An interventional study of 22G Franseen Needle Group and 22G Adapt Needle Group in Pancreatic Neoplasms, Mediastinal Neoplasms and Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm, sponsored by Huazhong University of Science and Technology. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in China. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 85 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2025-07-01.

Sponsored by Huazhong University of Science and Technology · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
576
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years to 85 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The investigators conduct a prospective, multicenter, blinded, randomized controlled trial to compare the diagnostic value and safety of the 22G Adapt needle versus the 22G Franseen needle for histopathological evaluation of solid lesions.

Read the detailed description

Participants are randomized into two groups: the EUS-FNB-A group (22G Franseen needle) and the EUS-FNB-B group (22G Adapt needle). The primary endpoint is diagnostic accuracy for solid mass lesions. A non-inferiority design is adopted, with group A as the control. The significance level (α) is set at 0.025 (one-sided), with a type II error (β) of 0.15, providing a statistical power of 85%. Based on previous literature, the assumed diagnostic accuracy of the 22G Adapt FNB is 90%, compared to 92% for the 22G Franseen FNB, with a non-inferiority margin of -10%. Assuming a 1:1 allocation and accounting for a 20% dropout rate, 288 participants are planned for each group, totaling 576 participants.

Done by professional statistical people with randomized block grouping method and SAS 9.4 statistical software to generate randomized serial number(001-576)for the two groups in 1:1 manner. The serial numbers are the randomized grouping numbers for the trial patients, block capacity is 4, totally 144 randomized block. The randomized grouping will be generated in duplicate copies and sealed. One copy send to trial centers for patient allocating, and the another copy be saved by the trial applicant unit. Every trail centers will be responsible for the screening of qualified patients, rank them in visit time to get the randomized grouping number so as to determine them goes to the EUS-FNA or EUS-FNB.The research people and patients in all trial centers should not know the the randomized grouping number and relevant groups. The group name will be sealed under scratch card. Every trial patients will get a unique randomized number, and it will not change through out the whole trial.

Use the inclusion and exclusion criteria to observe the patients and do relative inspections, and confirm if the patients qualified or not to the trial. Record the result of last time test before the treatment. Although it is better to get the informed consent before doing all kinds of observation and tests, if for some reason, the medical imaging examination has completed, as long as the imaging examination was done within 3 weeks before the needle biopsy, it can still be collect as baseline data (imaging examination can be done at other hospitals, but the trial center should issue a new evaluation report 1 week before the patient join the trial group); other lab test items done at 2 weeks before the needle biopsy can still be collect as baseline data for pre-research use, but these tests should be done at the trail center hospital so as to guarantee the data trace ability.

The investigators will do the needle passes for 2 times for all of them:the 1 needle passes with Slow-Pull and the 2 needle passes with 5 mL wet suction. If no core tissues obtained or the operator/onsite pathologist determine insufficient specimen after the operations above, then remedy procedures will be done, the operator use proper puncture method to continue the remedy biopsy. After the first round of needle biopsy, if the trial patient cannot be diagnosed, by getting the agreement of the patient, the patient will be cross-over to another trial group and do needle biopsy again on the same lesion 1 week later with the method mentioned above. Without knowing the needle biopsy type, the cytologist and pathologist evaluate the specimen quality and make diagnosis. Every specimen will be independently evaluated and diagnosed by 2 experts. If the 2 experts have different judgments, then these two experts discuss together and make the final diagnose discussion. If the same sample has 2 or more cytology smear slides, than take the highest score slide as the result. Follow up (outpatient follow up or telephone follow up) the patients at 1 week, 12 weeks and 36 weeks after the needle biopsy and collect the patients clinical data and confirm their final diagnosis.

During the trial, if severe adverse event occurs, the trialed center must take immediate actions necessary to guarantee the trialed patients' safety. Once severe adverse event occurs, the researchers should inform the trial applicant and the trail center's ethics committee within 24 hours after the researchers gets to know the adverse event. And the researchers should also fax the report to State Food and Drug Administration of China and the local provincial food and drug administration. After receiving the report, the applicant should inform other clinical trial centers within 24 hours. All the severe adverse events should be filed at group leader medical center and other trial centers.

Case Report Form (CRF ) will be filled by the researchers, every involved patient must have the CRF filled. This will be audited by clinical monitor and handed over to data administrator to input and manage data, the first copy will be kept by the applicant, the second copy will go to the trial center, and the third copy will be kept by the trail researchers. The data input and management will be taken care by specially assigned person. In order to guarantee the data accuracy, data input will be done twice by two independent data administrators, by computerized and manual verifying, hand over the data to statistical experts to do blind check and statistic analyzing.For the questions and doubts within the case report form, the data administrator make Data Resolution Query (DRQ) and via the clinical monitor asking the researchers. The researchers will answer and feed back as soon as possible. According to the researchers answer, data administrator will do the data modifying, confirming or inputting, and when necessary send out DRQ again.After blind audition and confirming that the established data base is correct, major researchers, applicant and the statistic analyzing people lock the data. The locked data will not be changed, and the data base will be handed over to statistical analyzer to do the statistic analyze according to the statistic analyzing plan. Problems found after data locking can be modified during the statistic analyzing procedure.This will be done by specialized statistic analyzing people according to the predetermined statistic analyzing plan. The statistic analyze will be carried out according to intention principle confirmed full analysis set and per-protocol set principle. After completing the statistic analyzing, the statistic analyzer issue the statistic analysis report and send this to major researchers to write the study report.

Statistic analyzing plan:⑴ General principle:① all the statistic tests are use the two-tailed-test method, P\<0.05 will be thought as the tested difference is statistical significance. ② the quantitative indicator description will calculate the Mean and Standard deviation. The classification indicator description will describe the cases and percentage of all types of cases. ⑵ Statistic analyzing method:① for the measurement data, compare it with the baseline value at selection period, use paired t-test or symbol rank sum test to compare with the before-after-difference within the group.② for the counting data, use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method to compare the groups. ⑶ Shedding analysis:Comparison of groups'total shedding rates and the shedding rates caused by adverse events will use x2 test or Fisher's exact test method. ⑷ The baseline value's equilibrium analysis: Use group t test or x2 test to compare the demography info and vital signs, disease history, and basic treatment and other indicators of baseline value, so as to measure the balance of the groups. The baseline evaluation will be done on Full Analysis Set (FAS) and Per-Protocol Set ( PPS). ⑸ Effectiveness analysis:The major indicator of effectiveness analysis is the diagnostic accuracy on malignant disease, and the indicators of second effectiveness include the percentage of Grade A specimen and complications rate etc. while the two groups rate and the Youden index comparison will use approximate normal Z test or use central effect x2 test.(6) Safety analysis:Use x2 test or Fisher's exact test to compare the adverse event/adverse reaction (include biopsy complications) rates between the groups. And use table to describe the adverse events during this trial project; the lab test results before and after the trial, the normal/abnormal changing condition and the relationship with this trial research when abnormal changes happened.

02

Conditions studied

  • Pancreatic Neoplasms
  • Mediastinal Neoplasms
  • Abdominal Neoplasm, Excluding Pancreas Neoplasm

Keywords

  • Endoscopic ultrasound
  • Fine-needle biopsy
03

In context

Pancreatic Neoplasms

3,896 studies on the registry are indexed under Pancreatic Neoplasms; 1,007 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 576 is above the median of 47 across 2,932 interventional studies indexed under Pancreatic Neoplasms.

Browse Pancreatic Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

Huazhong University of Science and Technology is the lead sponsor of 247 studies on the registry; 62 are open to participants now.

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

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 85 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

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

  • Over 18 years old and under 85 years old;
  • Presence of a solid lesion greater than 1 cm in diameter, as identified by cross-sectional imaging (Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Computed Tomography or abdominal ultrasound), located in anatomical regions accessible via endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-including but not limited to the pancreas, retroperitoneum, liver, mediastinum, or subepithelial layers of the gastrointestinal tract-where tissue acquisition is clinically indicated to establish a definitive histopathological diagnosis.;
  • Must be able to receive examinations in the research center;
  • Must be able to sign the .

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • ≤8.0 g/dL;
  • Pregnant women;
  • Coagulation disorders( \<50,000/mm3, > 1.5);
  • Took anticoagulants such as aspirin, warfarin in the latest week;
  • Acute pancreatitis in the past two weeks;
  • inability to safely perform Endoscopic Ultrasound-Guided Tissue Acquisition (eg, cardiorespiratory dysfunction, mental diseases, or drug addiction); refusal or inability to provide an .
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(4)

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.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Hemoglobin (Hb)

The protein in red blood cells that carries oxygen. A low level is anaemia, which can cause tiredness and breathlessness. Measured in g/dL or g/L (9 g/dL is 90 g/L).

Platelets

Blood cells that help blood clot. Too few raises the risk of bleeding and bruising. A usual adult range is about 150–400 × 10⁹/L (150,000–400,000 per µL); each lab has its own reference range.

INR, PT and aPTT (clotting tests)

Blood tests of how long blood takes to clot. The INR is the prothrombin time (PT) put on a common scale; about 1 is usual for someone not taking a blood thinner.

Criteria often make an exception for people on a blood thinner such as warfarin, whose INR is raised on purpose.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
Single (Outcomes assessor)
Enrollment
576 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Experimental
    22G Franseen Needle Group

    22G Franseen needles were adopted to acquire lesion tissues

    Device: 22G Franseen Needle Group

  • Experimental
    22G Adapt Needle Group

    22G Adapt needles were adopted to acquire lesion tissues

    Device: 22G Adapt Needle Group

Interventions

  • Device22G Franseen Needle Group

    Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Franseen, Boston Scientific, Winston-Salem, USA)

  • Device22G Adapt Needle Group

    Fine-needle-biopsy (22G Adapt, Micro.Tech Endoscopy, Nanjing, China)

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. The histological diagnostic yields

    The primary outcome measure of the study is to compare the histological diagnostic yield of EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy (EUS-FNB) using a 22G Franseen needle versus a 22G Adapt needle for both pancreatic and non-pancreatic solid lesions.

    Time frame: up to 15 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. The histological acquisition yields

    Comparison of histological tissue acquisition adequacy between 22G Adapt and 22G Franseen needles in EUS-FNB of solid masses.

    Time frame: up to 15 months

  2. The cytological diagnosis yields

    Comparison of cytological diagnostic yield between 22G Adapt and 22G Franseen needles in EUS-FNB of solid masses.

    Time frame: up to 15 months

  3. The Immunohistochemical (IHC) staining success rate

    Comparison of successful IHC analysis rates of biopsy samples obtained using 22G Adapt versus 22G Franseen needles during EUS-FNB for solid masses.

    Time frame: up to 15 months

07

Study locations

1 site
08

References and documents

Publications

  • Gkolfakis P, Crino SF, Tziatzios G, Ramai D, Papaefthymiou A, Papanikolaou IS, Triantafyllou K, Arvanitakis M, Lisotti A, Fusaroli P, Mangiavillano B, Carrara S, Repici A, Hassan C, Facciorusso A. Comparative diagnostic performance of end-cutting fine-needle biopsy needles for EUS tissue sampling of solid pancreatic masses: a network meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2022 Jun;95(6):1067-1077.e15. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2022.01.019. Epub 2022 Feb 4. PubMed 35124072 ↗
  • van Riet PA, Erler NS, Bruno MJ, Cahen DL. Comparison of fine-needle aspiration and fine-needle biopsy devices for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of solid lesions: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Apr;53(4):411-423. doi: 10.1055/a-1206-5552. Epub 2020 Aug 6. PubMed 32583392 ↗
  • Facciorusso A, Arvanitakis M, Crino SF, Fabbri C, Fornelli A, Leeds J, Archibugi L, Carrara S, Dhar J, Gkolfakis P, Haugk B, Iglesias Garcia J, Napoleon B, Papanikolaou IS, Seicean A, Stassen PMC, Vilmann P, Tham TC, Fuccio L. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Technical and Technology Review. Endoscopy. 2025 Apr;57(4):390-418. doi: 10.1055/a-2524-2596. Epub 2025 Feb 27. PubMed 40015316 ↗
  • Kovacevic B, Toxvaerd A, Klausen P, Larsen MH, Grutzmeier S, Detlefsen S, Karstensen JG, Brink L, Hassan H, Hogdall E, Vilmann P. Tissue amount and diagnostic yield of a novel franseen EUS-FNB and a standard EUS-FNA needle-A randomized controlled study in solid pancreatic lesions. Endosc Ultrasound. 2023 May-Jun;12(3):319-325. doi: 10.1097/eus.0000000000000007. Epub 2023 Jul 25. PubMed 37693112 ↗
  • Ashat M, Klair JS, Rooney SL, Vishal SJ, Jensen C, Sahar N, Murali AR, El-Abiad R, Gerke H. Randomized controlled trial comparing the Franseen needle with the Fork-tip needle for EUS-guided fine-needle biopsy. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):140-150.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.05.057. Epub 2020 Jun 9. PubMed 32526235 ↗
  • Kurita A, Yasukawa S, Zen Y, Yoshimura K, Ogura T, Ozawa E, Okabe Y, Asada M, Nebiki H, Shigekawa M, Ikeura T, Eguchi T, Maruyama H, Ueki T, Itonaga M, Hashimoto S, Shiomi H, Minami R, Hoki N, Takenaka M, Itokawa Y, Uza N, Hashigo S, Yasuda H, Takada R, Kamada H, Kawamoto H, Kawakami H, Moriyama I, Fujita K, Matsumoto H, Hanada K, Takemura T, Yazumi S. Comparison of a 22-gauge Franseen-tip needle with a 20-gauge forward-bevel needle for the diagnosis of type 1 autoimmune pancreatitis: a prospective, randomized, controlled, multicenter study (COMPAS study). Gastrointest Endosc. 2020 Feb;91(2):373-381.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2019.10.012. Epub 2019 Oct 22. PubMed 31654634 ↗
  • Pouw RE, Barret M, Biermann K, Bisschops R, Czako L, Gecse KB, de Hertogh G, Hucl T, Iacucci M, Jansen M, Rutter M, Savarino E, Spaander MCW, Schmidt PT, Vieth M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, van Hooft JE. Endoscopic tissue sampling - Part 1: Upper gastrointestinal and hepatopancreatobiliary tracts. European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1174-1188. doi: 10.1055/a-1611-5091. Epub 2021 Sep 17. PubMed 34535035 ↗
  • Cheng B, Zhang Y, Chen Q, Sun B, Deng Z, Shan H, Dou L, Wang J, Li Y, Yang X, Jiang T, Xu G, Wang G. Analysis of Fine-Needle Biopsy vs Fine-Needle Aspiration in Diagnosis of Pancreatic and Abdominal Masses: A Prospective, Multicenter, Randomized Controlled Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2018 Aug;16(8):1314-1321. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2017.07.010. Epub 2017 Jul 19. PubMed 28733257 ↗
  • Oh D, Kong J, Ko SW, Hong SM, So H, Hwang JS, Song TJ, Lee SK, Kim MH, Lee SS. A comparison between 25-gauge and 22-gauge Franseen needles for endoscopic ultrasound-guided sampling of pancreatic and peripancreatic masses: a randomized non-inferiority study. Endoscopy. 2021 Nov;53(11):1122-1129. doi: 10.1055/a-1369-8610. Epub 2021 Mar 2. PubMed 33652495 ↗
  • Gerke H, Rizk MK, Vanderheyden AD, Jensen CS. Randomized study comparing endoscopic ultrasound-guided Trucut biopsy and fine needle aspiration with high suction. Cytopathology. 2010 Feb;21(1):44-51. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2009.00656.x. Epub 2009 May 18. PubMed 19456845 ↗
  • Lee JK, Choi JH, Lee KH, Kim KM, Shin JU, Lee JK, Lee KT, Jang KT. A prospective, comparative trial to optimize sampling techniques in EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 May;77(5):745-51. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.12.009. Epub 2013 Feb 21. PubMed 23433878 ↗
  • Crino SF, Conti Bellocchi MC, Di Mitri R, Inzani F, Rimbas M, Lisotti A, Manfredi G, Teoh AYB, Mangiavillano B, Sendino O, Bernardoni L, Manfrin E, Scimeca D, Unti E, Carlino A, Voiosu T, Mateescu RB, Fusaroli P, Lega S, Buscarini E, Pergola L, Chan SM, Lamonaca L, Gines A, Fernandez-Esparrach G, Facciorusso A, Larghi A. Wet-suction versus slow-pull technique for endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle biopsy: a multicenter, randomized, crossover trial. Endoscopy. 2023 Mar;55(3):225-234. doi: 10.1055/a-1915-1812. Epub 2022 Aug 1. PubMed 35915956 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jul 1, 2025, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07012694
Collaborators
The Affiliated Nanjing Drum Tower Hospital of Nanjing University Medical School, The First Affiliated Hospital of Anhui Medical University, The First People's Hospital of Yunnan, The First Affiliated Hospital of University of Science and Technology of China
Responsible party
Bin Cheng (prof., Huazhong University of Science and Technology) — Principal investigator
First posted
Jun 10, 2025
Start date
Jul 2025 (estimated)
Primary completion
Sep 2026 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 10, 2026 (estimated)
Last update
Jul 1, 2025

Study contacts

Bin Cheng
Contact
b.cheng@tjh.tjmu.edu.cn
+8613986097542
Yanyan Zhang
Contact
d202482516@hust.edu.cn
+8613525031377
Bin Cheng
principal investigator · Tongji Hospital

Oversight

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

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Jun 2025. 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