Breast NeoplasmsNCT01447771
Decision Support for Women With Breast Cancer
A study of Breast Neoplasms, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
Breast cancer is a common malignancy among women in the United States. There are a variety of treatment decisions that need to be made. This study has been developed after a review of the literature demonstrated that women with breast cancer are making decisions regarding complex therapy issues in a way that is not… Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Neoplasms
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 14 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2011to Mar 2012
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages 18 years and older
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Women with early stage (Stage I and Stage II) breast cancer that are considering adjuvant therapy and are being evaluated at the Johns Hopkins Avon Foundation Breast Center.
- Age 18 years and older.
- Able to read and speak English.
Who cannot join
- Severe visual impairments that would make it difficult to read study instruments or inability to read.
- Lack of capacity to provide informed consent to participate in the study.
- Patients being seen for a second opinion.
- Patients with a history of previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
- Women who are pregnant.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Breast cancer is a common malignancy among women in the United States. There are a variety of treatment decisions that need to be made. This study has been developed after a review of the literature demonstrated that women with breast cancer are making decisions regarding complex therapy issues in a way that is not congruent with their decision-making control preference.
Some patients want to be empowered with information so that they can actively participate in the decision making about their care; others want to rely on the recommendations made by the oncologist. This is important because patients who were not satisfied with their adjuvant treatment decision noted a negative effect on quality of life and self image. These patients had more difficulties with treatment side effects; including aches, hot flashes, pain, and mood alteration. In additions the Institute of Medicine recommended that patient centeredness be a key aim of health care organizations and that all patients be given the opportunity to exercise the degree of control they choose over health care decisions that affect them.
It is hypothesized that women making decisions regarding adjuvant therapy who are supported to make decisions based on their preferred level of control will have positive psychological outcomes.
Read the detailed description
This evidence based study has been developed after a review of the literature demonstrated that 14 - 58% of women with breast cancer are making decisions regarding complex therapy issues in a way that is not congruent with their decision-making control preference. Because of the prevalence of decision-making control preference incongruence and strong evidence that providing support for a woman's decision making control preference is related to quality of life measures, this study will test the implementation of a nursing intervention to support the decision making of women with breast cancer. Using sample randomization with assignment to one of two groups, this study will explore whether using Degner's Control Preference (DCP) Scale supports decision making control preferences in women who are making decisions about breast cancer treatment. Results of the study will guide implementation of sustainable evidence-based behavioral practices that can have significant effects on quality of care outcomes.
This study will assess satisfaction with decision involvement, depression, and decision making distress in women with early stage breast cancer after a decision support intervention to support a woman's preferred decision control preference. It is hypothesized that a decision support intervention that consists of providing information from the Degner Control Preference (DCP) Scale to the provider and patient will have a positive effect on psychological outcomes (decision satisfaction, decision making distress, and depression) in women making decisions about breast cancer treatment. Testing the effect of the decision support intervention on decision satisfaction, decision making distress and depression will be measured using t-Tests.
Patients with early stage breast cancer who are scheduled to have a medical oncology consultation, to decide an adjuvant therapy regimen, will be asked to participate.
128 patients will be randomly assigned to a group in which the patient and their oncologist would know the patient's preferred level of decision making control (intervention group) or a group that would receive information about a balanced diet (attention control group). Two nurses on the research team will consent participants, participate in the intervention, and collect data through interviews. Post intervention interviews will occur within 24 hours of the intervention and 4 weeks later.
- Conditions
- Breast Neoplasms
- Being tested
- Decision control preference scale
- Keywords
- Decision making, Decisional aide
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Decision control preference scaleBehavioural
Also called DCP scale
At time 1, participants in the intervention group will be asked to complete the Decision Control Preference Scale.The range of decision control is measured by the Decision Control Preference (DCP) Scale. The scale is used to measure the preferred or actual role in decision making using five response statements: two represent an active or patient-controlled role, one a shared or collaborative role, and two represent a passive or provider-controlled role. The preferred level of decision making control will be known by the participant in the intervention group and the information given to the oncologist prior to the consultation regarding adjuvant therapy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Lifestyle counseling | Experimental | Decision control preference intervention Receives: Behavioral: Decision control preference scale |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Satisfaction with Decision at 24 hours
Satisfaction with Decision (SWD) scale: A 6 item tool with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1, "strongly disagree" to 5, "strongly agree", will be used to evaluate the patient's satisfaction with decision involvement by phone within 24 hours following the consultation and repeated 4 weeks later. This instrument is based on the Satisfaction with Decision Instrument of Holmes-Rovner. The SWD scale performed reliability, Cronbach's alpha = 0.86
Measured: 24 hours after consultation
Satisfaction with Decision at 4 weeks
Satisfaction with Decision (SWD) scale: A 6 item tool with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1, "strongly disagree" to 5, "strongly agree", will be used to evaluate the patient's satisfaction with decision involvement by phone within 24 hours following the consultation and repeated 4 weeks later. This instrument is based on the Satisfaction with Decision Instrument of Holmes-Rovner. The SWD scale performed reliability, Cronbach's alpha = 0.86
Measured: 4 weeks after consultation
Secondary outcomes (8)
Baseline Depression Score
This scale will be used to measure depressive symptoms. The CSES-D 10 is a 10-item brief version of a self-report questionnaire developed by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies at the National Institute of Mental Health for use in studies of depression in community samples. The CSES-D 10 version has been used across multiple populations. It has been shown to have test-retest reliability of 0.80 in patients with GI cancer.
Measured: Baseline before consultation
Baseline Impact of Event Score
A 15-item Likert scale ranging from total scores of 0 to 75 with levels of: 9-25 indicative of moderate adaptation difficulties and > 26 is considered indicative of clinical adaptation difficulties. Intrusion (the extent to which individuals are overwhelmed by thoughts and feelings of breast cancer, 7 items) and avoidance (the tendency to avoid thoughts and feelings about breast cancer, 8 items) are subscales. In this study, it will be used to measure patient distress in participating in health care decision making. The Cronbach's alpha for patients with GI cancer was 0.86.
Measured: Baseline, before consultation
Depression Score at 4 weeks
This scale will be used to measure depressive symptoms. The CSES-D 10 is a 10-item brief version of a self-report questionnaire developed by the Center for Epidemiologic Studies at the National Institute of Mental Health for use in studies of depression in community samples. The CSES-D 10 version has been used across multiple populations. It has been shown to have test-retest reliability of 0.80 in patients with GI cancer.
Measured: 4 weeks after consultation
Impact of Event score at 24 hours
A 15-item Likert scale ranging from total scores of 0 to 75 with levels of: 9-25 indicative of moderate adaptation difficulties and > 26 is considered indicative of clinical adaptation difficulties. Intrusion (the extent to which individuals are overwhelmed by thoughts and feelings of breast cancer, 7 items) and avoidance (the tendency to avoid thoughts and feelings about breast cancer, 8 items) are subscales. In this study, it will be used to measure patient distress in participating in health care decision making. The Cronbach's alpha for patients with GI cancer was 0.86.
Measured: 24 hours after consultation
Impact of Event Score at 4 weeks
A 15-item Likert scale ranging from total scores of 0 to 75 with levels of: 9-25 indicative of moderate adaptation difficulties and > 26 is considered indicative of clinical adaptation difficulties. Intrusion (the extent to which individuals are overwhelmed by thoughts and feelings of breast cancer, 7 items) and avoidance (the tendency to avoid thoughts and feelings about breast cancer, 8 items) are subscales. In this study, it will be used to measure patient distress in participating in health care decision making. The Cronbach's alpha for patients with GI cancer was 0.86.
Measured: 4 weeks after consultation
Congruence between preferred and actual decision making control at 24 hours
This is a yes/no answer to determine congruence between actual and preferred level of decision making control. Descriptive analysis of the results will be preformed
Measured: 24 hours after consultation
Congruence between preferred and actual decision making control at 4 weeks
This is a yes/no answer to determine congruence between actual and preferred level of decision making control. Descriptive analysis of the results will be preformed
Measured: 4 weeks after consultation
Baseline Impact of Event Score
A 15-item Likert scale ranging from total scores of 0 to 75 with levels of: 9-25 indicative of moderate adaptation difficulties and > 26 is considered indicative of clinical adaptation difficulties. Intrusion (the extent to which individuals are overwhelmed by thoughts and feelings of breast cancer, 7 items) and avoidance (the tendency to avoid thoughts and feelings about breast cancer, 8 items) are subscales. In this study, it will be used to measure patient distress in participating in health care decision making. The Cronbach's alpha for patients with GI cancer was 0.86.
Measured: Before consultation
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Oct 2011 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2011
- Primary completionMar 2012
- Study completionMar 2012
Why it stopped: Lack of funds to continue and volunteer recruitment member left position
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (6)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast NeoplasmsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 14 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Sharon Olsen, PhD, Principal investigator, Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01447771
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- NA00046799
- Other IDs
- J1158
- Status last verified
- Apr 2014
- First submitted
- 21 Sep 2011
- Last updated
- 9 Apr 2014
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O'Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA. 1997 May 14;277(18):1485-92.
PubMed 9145723Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997 Fall;29(3):21-43.
PubMed 9505581Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N, Rovner DR, Breer ML, Rothert ML, Padonu G, Talarczyk G. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making. 1996 Jan-Mar;16(1):58-64. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9601600114.
PubMed 8717600Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, Chew HK, Gaynor ER, Hayes DF, Epstein A, Albain KS. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 1;28(10):1671-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2119. Epub 2010 Jan 11.
PubMed 20065191Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006 Jan;15(1):9-19. doi: 10.1002/pon.907.
PubMed 15669023Shaha M, Cox CL, Talman K, Kelly D. Uncertainty in breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer: implications for supportive care. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2008;40(1):60-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00207.x.
PubMed 18302593
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 9 Apr 2014. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Decision Support for Women With Breast Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01447771
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- NA00046799
- Conditions
- Breast Neoplasms
- Keywords
- Decision making, Decisional aide
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- TerminatedReason stopped: Lack of funds to continue and volunteer recruitment member left position
- Enrolment
- 14 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns HopkinsUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Sep 2011
- Primary completion
- Mar 2012 (actual)
- Study completion
- Mar 2012 (actual)
- First posted
- 6 Oct 2011 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Breast cancer is a common malignancy among women in the United States. There are a variety of treatment decisions that need to be made. This study has been developed after a review of the literature demonstrated that women with breast cancer are making decisions regarding complex therapy issues in a way that is not congruent with their decision-making control preference.
Some patients want to be empowered with information so that they can actively participate in the decision making about their care; others want to rely on the recommendations made by the oncologist. This is important because patients who were not satisfied with their adjuvant treatment decision noted a negative effect on quality of life and self image. These patients had more difficulties with treatment side effects; including aches, hot flashes, pain, and mood alteration. In additions the Institute of Medicine recommended that patient centeredness be a key aim of health care organizations and that all patients be given the opportunity to exercise the degree of control they choose over health care decisions that affect them.
It is hypothesized that women making decisions regarding adjuvant therapy who are supported to make decisions based on their preferred level of control will have positive psychological outcomes.
Detailed description
This evidence based study has been developed after a review of the literature demonstrated that 14 - 58% of women with breast cancer are making decisions regarding complex therapy issues in a way that is not congruent with their decision-making control preference. Because of the prevalence of decision-making control preference incongruence and strong evidence that providing support for a woman's decision making control preference is related to quality of life measures, this study will test the implementation of a nursing intervention to support the decision making of women with breast cancer. Using sample randomization with assignment to one of two groups, this study will explore whether using Degner's Control Preference (DCP) Scale supports decision making control preferences in women who are making decisions about breast cancer treatment. Results of the study will guide implementation of sustainable evidence-based behavioral practices that can have significant effects on quality of care outcomes.
This study will assess satisfaction with decision involvement, depression, and decision making distress in women with early stage breast cancer after a decision support intervention to support a woman's preferred decision control preference. It is hypothesized that a decision support intervention that consists of providing information from the Degner Control Preference (DCP) Scale to the provider and patient will have a positive effect on psychological outcomes (decision satisfaction, decision making distress, and depression) in women making decisions about breast cancer treatment. Testing the effect of the decision support intervention on decision satisfaction, decision making distress and depression will be measured using t-Tests.
Patients with early stage breast cancer who are scheduled to have a medical oncology consultation, to decide an adjuvant therapy regimen, will be asked to participate.
128 patients will be randomly assigned to a group in which the patient and their oncologist would know the patient's preferred level of decision making control (intervention group) or a group that would receive information about a balanced diet (attention control group). Two nurses on the research team will consent participants, participate in the intervention, and collect data through interviews. Post intervention interviews will occur within 24 hours of the intervention and 4 weeks later.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Lifestyle counseling | Experimental | Behavioral: Decision control preference scaleDecision control preference intervention |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Women with early stage (Stage I and Stage II) breast cancer that are considering adjuvant therapy and are being evaluated at the Johns Hopkins Avon Foundation Breast Center.
- Age 18 years and older.
- Able to read and speak English.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Severe visual impairments that would make it difficult to read study instruments or inability to read.
- Lack of capacity to provide informed consent to participate in the study.
- Patients being seen for a second opinion.
- Patients with a history of previous neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
- Women who are pregnant.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Decision control preference scaleAlso: DCP scaleAt time 1, participants in the intervention group will be asked to complete the Decision Control Preference Scale.The range of decision control is measured by the Decision Control Preference (DCP) Scale. The scale is used to measure the preferred or actual role in decision making using five response statements: two represent an active or patient-controlled role, one a shared or collaborative role, and two represent a passive or provider-controlled role. The preferred level of decision making control will be known by the participant in the intervention group and the information given to the oncologist prior to the consultation regarding adjuvant therapy | Behavioural | Lifestyle counseling |
Primary outcome
Satisfaction with Decision at 24 hours
Time frame: 24 hours after consultation
Satisfaction with Decision (SWD) scale: A 6 item tool with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1, "strongly disagree" to 5, "strongly agree", will be used to evaluate the patient's satisfaction with decision involvement by phone within 24 hours following the consultation and repeated 4 weeks later. This instrument is based on the Satisfaction with Decision Instrument of Holmes-Rovner. The SWD scale performed reliability, Cronbach's alpha = 0.86
Satisfaction with Decision at 4 weeks
Time frame: 4 weeks after consultation
Satisfaction with Decision (SWD) scale: A 6 item tool with a 5-point Likert scale ranging from 1, "strongly disagree" to 5, "strongly agree", will be used to evaluate the patient's satisfaction with decision involvement by phone within 24 hours following the consultation and repeated 4 weeks later. This instrument is based on the Satisfaction with Decision Instrument of Holmes-Rovner. The SWD scale performed reliability, Cronbach's alpha = 0.86
8 secondary outcomes
Baseline Depression Score
Time frame: Baseline before consultation
Baseline Impact of Event Score
Time frame: Baseline, before consultation
Depression Score at 4 weeks
Time frame: 4 weeks after consultation
Impact of Event score at 24 hours
Time frame: 24 hours after consultation
Impact of Event Score at 4 weeks
Time frame: 4 weeks after consultation
Congruence between preferred and actual decision making control at 24 hours
Time frame: 24 hours after consultation
Congruence between preferred and actual decision making control at 4 weeks
Time frame: 4 weeks after consultation
Baseline Impact of Event Score
Time frame: Before consultation
Results and safety
The study was stopped early (reason given: Lack of funds to continue and volunteer recruitment member left position). Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 9 Apr 2014.
- Background: PubMed 9145723Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O'Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA. 1997 May 14;277(18):1485-92.
- Background: PubMed 9505581Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997 Fall;29(3):21-43.
- Background: PubMed 8717600Holmes-Rovner M, Kroll J, Schmitt N, Rovner DR, Breer ML, Rothert ML, Padonu G, Talarczyk G. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med Decis Making. 1996 Jan-Mar;16(1):58-64. doi: 10.1177/0272989X9601600114.
- Background: PubMed 20065191Lo SS, Mumby PB, Norton J, Rychlik K, Smerage J, Kash J, Chew HK, Gaynor ER, Hayes DF, Epstein A, Albain KS. Prospective multicenter study of the impact of the 21-gene recurrence score assay on medical oncologist and patient adjuvant breast cancer treatment selection. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Apr 1;28(10):1671-6. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.2119. Epub 2010 Jan 11.
- Background: PubMed 15669023Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006 Jan;15(1):9-19. doi: 10.1002/pon.907.
- Background: PubMed 18302593Shaha M, Cox CL, Talman K, Kelly D. Uncertainty in breast, prostate, and colorectal cancer: implications for supportive care. J Nurs Scholarsh. 2008;40(1):60-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1547-5069.2007.00207.x.
Related trials for Breast Neoplasms
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
RecruitingPhase 2
Gene Signatures to Guide HR+MBC Therapy in a Diverse Cohort
Invasive Mammary Carcinoma, Metastatic Breast Cancer
Not yet recruitingObservational study
Comparison of Reliability, Time Cost, and Participant Comfort of Lymphedema Assessments in Upper Extremity
Lymphedema, Upper Extremity Lymphedema
RecruitingPhase 3
A Study of Camrelizumab Plus Chemotherapy in Combination With or Without Famitinib as Neoadjuvant Therapy in Participants With Triple Negative Breast Cancer (BCTOP-T-N01)
TNBC - Triple-Negative Breast Cancer
RecruitingPhase 3
Testing Whether Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib is as Effective as Chemotherapy Followed by Hormone Therapy With Ribociclib for the Treatment of High Anatomic Stage Breast Cancer With Low Recurrence Risk, The RxFINE-Low Trial
Anatomic Stage II Breast Cancer AJCC v8, Anatomic Stage IIIA Breast Cancer AJCC v8
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Sharon Olsen, PhD principal investigator
Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study of Breast Neoplasms, run by Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 5 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: stopped early, as of the sponsor's last update on 9 Apr 2014. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was stopped early (reason given: Lack of funds to continue and volunteer recruitment member left position). Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Satisfaction with Decision at 24 hours (time frame: 24 hours after consultation). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT01447771, which also lists 6 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 9 Apr 2014.