Who are we?


Signup for

Online registration

Log in to register
your trial

Search a trial




van CCT (UK)

van CCT (UK)

Liver stiffness measurement with MR Elastography.

- candidate number8393
- NTR NumberNTR2489
- ISRCTNISRCTN wordt niet meer aangevraagd.
- Date ISRCTN created
- date ISRCTN requested
- Date Registered NTR31-aug-2010
- Secondary IDs09/127 / 0904-014 ; MEC AMC / Fonds Nuts-Ohra
- Public TitleLiver stiffness measurement with MR Elastography.
- Scientific TitleMR Elastography for the non-invasive assessment of liver fibrosis in patients with chronic viral liver disease compared with FibroScan and liver biopsy.
- hypothesisMR Elastography can be used as a non-invasive tool to diagnose, stage and monitor liver fibrosis. MR Elastography has a better accuracy than FibroScan for the assessment of intermediate fibrosis stages.
- Healt Condition(s) or Problem(s) studiedHepatitis C, Hepatitis B, MRI, Elastography, Liver
- Inclusion criteria1. Patients over 18 years of age;
2. Have viral hepatitis B or C;
3. Recently (< 6 weeks ago) had a liver biopsy or who are scheduled for liver biopsy.
- Exclusion criteria1. Patients with an alcohol intake for >3 units per day for males and >2 units per day for females;
2. Patients who are pregnant, claustrophobic, who have magnetic or radiofrequent implants;
3. Patients with extreme obesity.
- mec approval receivedyes
- multicenter trialno
- randomisedno
- groupParallel
- TypeSingle arm
- Studytypeintervention
- planned startdate 13-nov-2009
- planned closingdate1-jun-2011
- Target number of participants83
- InterventionsConsenting patients will undergo an MRI scan of the liver (MR Elastography and MR Spectroscopy measurement). Standard clinical practice includes liver biopsy and FibroScan measurement. Liver biopsy is used as reference standard. The MRI reader is blinded to the results of the liver biopsy.

All patients will fill out a questionnaire to evaluate the burden of MR Elastography, Fibroscan and liver biopsy.
- Primary outcomeThe accuracy of MR elastography for fibrosis measurement compared with FibroScan and liver biopsy.
- Secondary outcome1. The influence of hepatic fat content and inflammation on MR Elastography measurement;
2. The evaluation of anti-viral treatment response with MR Elastography.
- TimepointsThe MRI scan, Fibroscan and liver biopsy have to be performed within a timeframe of 6 weeks.
- Trial web siteN/A
- statusopen: patient inclusion
- Sponsor/Initiator Academic Medical Center (AMC), Amsterdam
- Funding
(Source(s) of Monetary or Material Support)
Fonds Nuts-Ohra
- PublicationsN/A
- Brief summaryThe prognosis of patients with chronic liver disease depends to a high degree on the presence and degree of liver fibrosis. In this respect determination of different degrees of liver fibrosis is crucial for the management of chronic liver disease. Liver biopsy is the current gold standard for diagnosing chronic liver disease. However, liver biopsy is accompanied by the risk of complications, patient discomfort and poor reproducibility due to sampling errors. Transient Elastography (FibroScan) is now used as a non-invasive alternative to detect liver fibrosis by measuring liver stiffness. This ultrasound technique can differentiate between severe liver fibrosis and no fibrosis, but is not sensitive enough to measure intermediate degrees of liver fibrosis.

Magnetic Resonance Elastography (MRE) has been introduced as a new and accurate non-invasive method to determine liver fibrosis. MRE provides reproducible visco-elastic information of the whole liver, and is not prone to sampling errors. Up to date a few clinical studies have investigated the accuracy of MRE. However, these studies were conducted in heterogeneous patient groups. At this moment it is not clear whether these findings can be applied unconditionally to specific patient groups such as patients with viral hepatitis B and C. We will therefore evaluate the accuracy of MRE compared with FibroScan and liver biopsy in patients with hepatitis B and C.

We considered patients with a fibrosis stage of F2, F3 or F4 as diseased. A fibrosis stage of F0 or F1 was considered non-diseased. Given the reported sensitivity of 92% for MRE and 75.4% for FibroScan for detection of fibrosis stage of F2 or higher, a minimum number of 50 patients is required in this group. Given a prevalence of 60% of patients with fibrosis stage F2, F3 or F4, we need to include a total number of 83 patients in this study over an 18 month inclusion period.
- Main changes (audit trail)
- RECORD31-aug-2010 - 9-sep-2010

  • Indien u gegevens wilt toevoegen of veranderen, kunt u een mail sturen naar