Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to compare Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) and Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) stress myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) with regadenoson in order to detect the presence or absence of reversible defects.
All participants will be randomized to one of two imaging sequences: rest/stress SPECT on Day 1 followed by stress/rest MDCT on Day 2 or stress/rest MDCT on Day 1 followed by rest/stress SPECT on Day 2. All stress scans will involve the injection of regadenoson as the pharmacologic stress agent.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) | Experimental | Resting SPECT imaging was performed prior to regadenoson stress SPECT imaging. Imaging was conducted with one of two radiotracers (99mTc sestamibi or tetrofosmin). Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to stress SPECT as a single bolus injection. |
|
| Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT) | Experimental | Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT), composed of CCTA and regadenoson CTP. Regadenoson stress CTP was performed prior to rest CCTA/CTP imaging. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to stress CTP as a single bolus injection. The rest CCTA/CTP was performed at least 30 minutes after completion of the stress CTP, after resolution of any symptoms brought on by the regadenoson infusion and after the participant's heart rate had returned to baseline. |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| regadenoson | Drug | Administered by intravenous bolus. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Number of Participants With Reversible Defects | The number of reversible defects categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from the 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of 2 or more segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Overall Image Quality of Scans by Modality and Reviewer | Overall image quality was assessed by three independent blinded readers for each modality (single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT)). Image quality was rated on a 4-point scale as either excellent, good, fair or poor at rest using SPECT and MDCT and under stress using regadenoson SPECT and regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP). |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Male subjects must be ≥ 45 years of age
Female subjects must be ≥ 50 years of age
Subject has met at least one of the following three criteria:
Subject has been referred for a clinically indicated myocardial perfusion imaging procedure or Cardiac CT procedure for suspected moderate or high risk CAD
Subject must abstain from eating and drinking 30 minutes prior and 30 minutes post study drug administration
Subject must abstain from smoking 3 hours prior and 8 hours post study drug administration
Subject must abstain from any intake of methylxanthine-containing foods and beverages within 12 hours prior to Day 1 visit through the Day 3 Follow-Up Visit, as these foods may alter regadenoson effects. Subject is able to safely abstain from theophylline use for 12 hours prior to study drug administration
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Senior Medical Director | Astellas Pharma Global Development | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sutter Roseville Medical Center | Roseville | California | 95661 | United States | ||
| Harbor UCLA Medical Center |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 24314823 | Derived | Cury RC, Kitt TM, Feaheny K, Akin J, George RT. Regadenoson-stress myocardial CT perfusion and single-photon emission CT: rationale, design, and acquisition methods of a prospective, multicenter, multivendor comparison. J Cardiovasc Comput Tomogr. 2014 Jan-Feb;8(1):2-12. doi: 10.1016/j.jcct.2013.09.004. Epub 2013 Oct 18. |
| Label | URL |
|---|---|
| Link to results on the Astellas Clinical Study Results website. | View source |
Not provided
Access to anonymized individual participant level data collected during the study, in addition to study-related supporting documentation, is planned for studies conducted with approved product indications and formulations, as well as products terminated during development. Studies conducted with product indications or formulations that remain active in development are assessed after study completion to determine if Individual Participant Data can be shared. Further details on Astellas' data sharing policy can be found at https://www.clinicaltrials.astellas.com/transparency/.
Access to participant level data is offered to researchers after publication of the primary manuscript (if applicable) and is available as long as Astellas has legal authority to provide the data.
Researchers must submit a proposal to conduct a scientifically relevant analysis of the study data. The research proposal is reviewed by an Independent Research Panel. If the proposal is approved, access to the study data is provided in a secure data sharing environment after receipt of a signed Data Sharing Agreement.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Sequence 1: SPECT - MDCT | Day 1: a rest Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) and a regadenoson stress SPECT procedure. Day 2: a regadenoson stress Computed Tomography Perfusion (CTP) and a rest Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA)/CTP procedure. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to each stress procedure as a single bolus injection. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| technetium Tc99m sestamibi /technetium Tc99m tetrafosmin | Radiation | Administered by intravenous infusion |
|
|
| Contrast | Radiation | Administered by intravenous infusion. |
|
| Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography | Procedure | Procedure/Surgery |
|
| Multidetector Computed Tomography | Procedure | Procedure/Surgery |
|
| Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery (LAD) | The number of reversible defects in the LAD categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Right Coronary Artery (RCA) | The number of reversible defects in the RCA categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Circumflex Coronary Artery (LCX) | The number of reversible defects in the LCX categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Number of Participants With Fixed Defects | Using the 17-segment scoring system, a segment scored above 1 (i.e., 2 to 4) and equal at rest and stress was counted as having a fixed defect. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Percentage of Participants With Two or More Ischemic Segments on SPECT, But Less on CT | Using SPECT as the reference standard, the false negative percentage was calculated as the percentage of participants with two or more ischemic segments on SPECT, but less on CT. | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| Torrance |
| California |
| 90502 |
| United States |
| Cardiovascular Research Center of South Florida | Miami | Florida | 33173 | United States |
| Baptist Hospital of Miami | Miami | Florida | 33176 | United States |
| Midwest Cardiology Associates, P.C. | Overland Park | Kansas | 66029 | United States |
| Maine Research Associates | Auburn | Maine | 04210 | United States |
| Massachusetts General Hospital | Boston | Massachusetts | 02114 | United States |
| Brigham and Women's Hospital | Boston | Massachusetts | 02115 | United States |
| Berkshire Medical Center | Pittsfield | Massachusetts | 01201 | United States |
| Henry Ford Health System | Detroit | Michigan | 48202 | United States |
| Oregon Health and Science University | Portland | Oregon | 97239 | United States |
| FG001 |
| Sequence 2: MDCT - SPECT |
Day 1: a regadenoson stress CTP and a rest CCTA/CTP procedure. Day 2: a rest SPECT and a regadenoson stress SPECT procedure. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to each stress procedure as a single bolus injection. |
| Randomized + 1 Stress Scan |
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Safety Analysis Set (SAF): All randomized participants who received at least 1 dose of regadenoson.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Sequence 1: SPECT - MDCT | Day 1: a rest Single Photon Emission Computed Tomography (SPECT) and a regadenoson stress SPECT procedure. Day 2: a regadenoson stress Computed Tomography Perfusion (CTP) and a rest Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography (CCTA)/CTP procedure. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to each stress procedure as a single bolus injection. |
| BG001 | Sequence 2: MDCT - SPECT | Day 1: a regadenoson stress CTP and a rest CCTA/CTP procedure. Day 2: a rest SPECT and a regadenoson stress SPECT procedure. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to each stress procedure as a single bolus injection. |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized | Number | participants |
| ||||||||||||||||
| Race/Ethnicity, Customized | Number | participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Number of Participants With Reversible Defects | The number of reversible defects categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from the 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of 2 or more segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set, defined as all randomized patients with interpretable SPECT and CTP scans as determined by at least two of the three blinded readers. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Overall Image Quality of Scans by Modality and Reviewer | Overall image quality was assessed by three independent blinded readers for each modality (single photon emission computed tomography (SPECT) and multidetector computed tomography (MDCT)). Image quality was rated on a 4-point scale as either excellent, good, fair or poor at rest using SPECT and MDCT and under stress using regadenoson SPECT and regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP). | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Anterior Descending Coronary Artery (LAD) | The number of reversible defects in the LAD categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Right Coronary Artery (RCA) | The number of reversible defects in the RCA categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Reversible Defects in the Left Circumflex Coronary Artery (LCX) | The number of reversible defects in the LCX categorized into absence or presence of ischemia (0-1 versus ≥2), as assessed by the central imaging laboratory for both SPECT and MDCT. The 17-segment model for standardized myocardial segmentation was used for myocardial perfusion readings for SPECT and MDCT. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. The median score from 3 blinded readers for each segment was used. If the stress score was ≥ 2 and the rest score was less than the stress score, the segment was counted as having a reversible defect. A participant was classified as ischemic in the presence of ≥ 2 segments with reversible defects, excluding segment 17. | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set where scans were available. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Fixed Defects | Using the 17-segment scoring system, a segment scored above 1 (i.e., 2 to 4) and equal at rest and stress was counted as having a fixed defect. At rest and stress, each segment was scored on a 0 to 4 scale according to the amount of contrast or radiotracer the myocardium in the segment absorbed: -0: normal perfusion -1: slightly reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -2: moderately reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -3: severely reduced contrast/radiotracer uptake -4: absent contrast/radiotracer uptake. | The number of participants analyzed represents the full analysis set. | Posted | Number | participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percentage of Participants With Two or More Ischemic Segments on SPECT, But Less on CT | Using SPECT as the reference standard, the false negative percentage was calculated as the percentage of participants with two or more ischemic segments on SPECT, but less on CT. | Full analysis set participants with two or more reversible defects. | Posted | Number | percentage of participants | Day 1 and Day 2 |
|
|
Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were defined as adverse events observed from the time of administration of regadenoson to 24 hours after last study drug administration within each modality, i.e. from Day 1 to Day 3.
Safety Analysis Set composed of all randomized patients who received at least 1 dose of regadenoson.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | SPECT | Resting SPECT imaging was performed prior to regadenoson stress SPECT imaging. Imaging was conducted with one of two radiotracers (99mTc sestamibi or tetrofosmin). Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to stress SPECT as a single bolus injection. | 1 | 117 | 53 | 117 | ||
| EG001 | MDCT | Multidetector Computed Tomography (MDCT), composed of CCTA and regadenoson CTP. Regadenoson stress CTP was performed prior to rest CCTA/CTP imaging. Regadenoson 0.4 mg was administered prior to stress CTP as a single bolus injection. The rest CCTA/CTP was performed at least 30 minutes after completion of the stress CTP, after resolution of any symptoms brought on by the regadenoson infusion and after the participant's heart rate had returned to baseline. | 0 | 116 | 59 | 116 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Gastritis | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dizziness | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Flushing | Vascular disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Angina pectoris | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Chest discomfort | General disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dyspnoea | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA Version 11.1 | Systematic Assessment |
|
Company makes no warranties or representations of any kind as to the posting, expressed or implied, including warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not be liable for any damages.
Institute and/or Principal Investigator may publish trial data generated at their specific study site after Sponsor publication of the multi-center data. Sponsor must receive a site's manuscript at least 30 days prior to publication to ensure that no confidential information of Sponsor is included in the document. Sponsor may delay the publication for an additional 60 days to seek patent protection.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Senior Medical Director, Medical Affairs | Astellas Scientific and Medical Affairs, Inc. / Astellas Pharma Global Development, Inc. | ClinicalTrials.Disclosure@us.astellas.com |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003324 | Coronary Artery Disease |
| D007511 | Ischemia |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D003327 | Coronary Disease |
| D017202 | Myocardial Ischemia |
| D006331 | Heart Diseases |
| D002318 | Cardiovascular Diseases |
| D001161 | Arteriosclerosis |
| D001157 | Arterial Occlusive Diseases |
| D014652 | Vascular Diseases |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| C430916 | regadenoson |
| D017256 | Technetium Tc 99m Sestamibi |
| C078700 | technetium tc-99m tetrofosmin |
| D003287 | Contrast Media |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D009570 | Nitriles |
| D009930 | Organic Chemicals |
| D015609 | Organotechnetium Compounds |
| D009942 | Organometallic Compounds |
| D064907 | Diagnostic Uses of Chemicals |
| D020228 | Pharmacologic Actions |
| D020164 | Chemical Actions and Uses |
| D020313 | Specialty Uses of Chemicals |
Not provided
Not provided
| Male |
|
| Black or African American |
|
| Asian |
|
| Hispanic or Latino |
|
|
| SPECT: All Reversible defects |
|
Analysis of image quality of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images performed by MDCT Reviewer 1. |
| OG004 | MDCT: Reviewer 2 | Analysis of image quality of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images performed by MDCT Reviewer 2. |
| OG005 | MDCT: Reviewer 3 | Analysis of image quality of multidetector computed tomography (MDCT) images performed by MDCT Reviewer 3. |
|
|
| OG002 | CTP: All Reversible Defects | All participants as assessed by regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP). |
|
|
| OG002 | CTP: All Reversible Defects | All participants as assessed by regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP). |
|
|
| OG002 | CTP: All Reversible Defects | All participants as assessed by regadenoson stress computed tomography perfusion (CTP). |
|
|
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
|
|
|