Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11Early Phase 1NCT02546752
Use of a Patient Education/Messaging Platform to Increase Uptake and Series Completion of the HPV Vaccine
A Early Phase 1 study testing THEO in people with Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11 and Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 16, run by Regenstrief Institute, Inc. at 5 sites in United States.
Trial summary
This primary goal of this study is to assess whether patient whose parents watch a standardized digital video using the integrated digital approach during a routine office visit are more likely to accept a dose of HPV vaccine (1st, 2nd, or 3rd dose) compared to those not completing the program. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 11 to 17 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 16, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 18
- What is being tested?
- THEO
- Type of treatment
- Vaccines, Pill or oral medicine
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 1,306 participants
- Where
- 5 sitesUnited States
- Study dates
- Sep 2015to May 2016
- Phase
- Early Phase 1
- 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 11 to 17 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child
Who may be able to join
- Parents/legal guardians of 11-17 year old children.
- Children receive their healthcare at one of the 5 CHICA clinics.
- Parents are able to read either English or Spanish.
- Children have received no more than 2 doses of HPV vaccine
Who cannot join
- Parents will be excluded if their child is outside of the designated age range of 11-17 years, if the child has completed the 3-dose HPV vaccine series, or if the parent does not read either English or Spanish.
Trial locations and contacts
5 sites in 1 country.
5 sites in 1 country
United States5 sites
Eskenazi Health Outpatient Care Center
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46202
Eskenazi Health Center Blackburn
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46208
Eskenazi Health Center Forest Manor
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46226
Eskenazi Health West 38th Street
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46254
Eskenazi Health Pecar
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46268
About this study
This primary goal of this study is to assess whether patient whose parents watch a standardized digital video using the integrated digital approach during a routine office visit are more likely to accept a dose of HPV vaccine (1st, 2nd, or 3rd dose) compared to those not completing the program. The study team anticipates eligible patients in the intervention clinics to have higher rates of HPV vaccine acceptance (1st, 2nd, or 3rd doses) than patients in the usual care comparison clinics.
Additionally, the study team is interested in determining the impact of the integrated system on clinical workflow by measuring the number of minutes of each patient office visit when using the system compared to the number of minutes of each visit in offices where the system is not used.
Although this is a descriptive/exploratory aim, our expectation is that the THEO system will have minimal impact on patient flow.
Read the detailed description
Brief Summary of Design: This is a 2-arm randomized study, with randomization occurring at the level of clinic. Five clinics will be included (2 implementing the THEO video; 3 providing usual care). All five clinics have been using the Child Health Improvement through Computer Automation System (CHICA) for several years. The evaluation phase of the study will last for approximately 6-7 months.
The CHICA System
The Child Health Improvement through Computer Automation system (CHICA) is a computer based decision support system that operates as a front end to the electronic medical record system (EMR). When a child is registered in the clinic, the registration system sends an HL7 ADT (registration) message to CHICA. In response, CHICA requests a download of the patient's record from the EMR. CHICA applies a rule base consisting of hundreds of Arden Syntax rules to the data in the record to select 20 yes/no questions that are displayed on an electronic tablet. The family answers the questions and returns the tablet to the medical assistant who enters the child's height, weight and other measurements onto another page on the tablet.
At the same time that CHICA produces the questions for family, it sends an HL7 request to CHIRP, the Indiana immunization registry. In response, CHICA receives a download of the child's immunization record. The download includes CHIRP's "forecast" of the immunizations for which the patient is due.
At the end of these processes, CHICA produces several paper documents. The first is the physician worksheet (PWS). The PWS includes up to six alerts and reminders for the physician. The reminders are selected by CHICA, using its Arden Syntax rule set based on the patient's EMR and answers provided on the tablet. Each alert has up to six check boxes with which the physician can document how s/he responded to the alert. The PWS, when completed, is scanned, the coded data corresponding to the check boxes are stored, and text is written into the physician's note in the medical record. CHICA may also produce any of a large number of handouts for helping the physician with assessment or patient education. CHICA also produces a summary of the patient's immunization history as well and advice on what shots the child is due to receive.
In an ongoing study of the Regenstrief-Merck collaboration, the investigators are studying the effect of providing physicians with a suggested "script" for recommending HPV vaccination to eligible patients' families. The study randomizes by physician whether the script is provided or whether the physician receives a simple reminder.
- Conditions
- Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 16, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 18, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 6, Cervical Cancer
- Being tested
- THEO
- Medical subject headings
- Uterine Cervical Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
THEOOther
THEO is interactive patient engagement software that runs on an iPad tablet platform (developed by Noble.MD). THEO is the intervention in this study.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| THEO Video Arm | Experimental | THEO is interactive patient engagement software that runs on an iPad tablet platform (developed by Noble.MD). Two programs have been developed. Parents/guardians of children who have not received the first HPV vaccine, will first assess whether the family has already decided in favor of the HPV vaccine or if they would like more information. The parent/guardian will be shown a video specific to where they are in the decision-making process. After completion, the THEO system will then ask the parent/guardian a series of Post Video questions. Parents/guardians of children who have received the first or second vaccine in the series, will emphasize the need to make the first vaccine "count". Pre and post video questions have been developed. Receives: Other: THEO |
| Usual Care Arm | No intervention | This arm will receive usual care. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Outcome Measure 1: Difference Between Average HPV Vaccine Series Initiation and Completion Rates
Difference between average HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates (as recorded in the CHIRP immunization registry) between sites using THEO integrated technology product compared to HPV Vaccination rates at Eskenazi sites not using THEO integrated technology product. Note that CHICA operates in 5 clinics in the Eskenazi Health Network. These clinics have been matched into two groups, each with 2 clinics, based on race and ethnicity of their patients. We will randomly assign one of these two groups to use THEO. The other group plus an additional CHICA clinic will continue to use CHICA without THEO.
Measured: Seven Months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Outcome Measure 1: Relative Difference in Time of Appointment
Relative differences in overall time of appointment for patient visits in which any dose of the HPV vaccine was given after using the integrated digital intervention, compared to overall time of appointment for patient visits in which any dose of the HPV vaccine was given after not using the integrated digital intervention
Measured: Seven Months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted11 Sep 2015 (estimated)
- Study startSep 2015
- Primary completionMay 2016
- Study completionMay 2016
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (33)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11Studies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Early Phase 1
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 1,306 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Regenstrief Institute, Inc.
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Gregory D Zimet, PhD, Principal investigator, 317-274-8812
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02546752
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Merck - 20
- Status last verified
- May 2016
- First submitted
- 9 Sep 2015
- Last updated
- 25 May 2016
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Individual provider data will not be shared.
Publications
Parkin DM, Bray F. Chapter 2: The burden of HPV-related cancers. Vaccine. 2006 Aug 31;24 Suppl 3:S3/11-25. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.05.111.
PubMed 16949997Giuliano AR, Anic G, Nyitray AG. Epidemiology and pathology of HPV disease in males. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 May;117(2 Suppl):S15-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.026. Epub 2010 Feb 6.
PubMed 20138345Chaturvedi AK. Beyond cervical cancer: burden of other HPV-related cancers among men and women. J Adolesc Health. 2010 Apr;46(4 Suppl):S20-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.01.016.
PubMed 20307840Haupt RM, Sings HL. The efficacy and safety of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus 6/11/16/18 vaccine gardasil. J Adolesc Health. 2011 Nov;49(5):467-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.07.003. Epub 2011 Sep 9.
PubMed 22018560Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Pasternak B, Svanstrom H, Sparen P, Hviid A. Autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic adverse events after immunisation of adolescent girls with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in Denmark and Sweden: cohort study. BMJ. 2013 Oct 9;347:f5906. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f5906.
PubMed 24108159Scheller NM, Svanstrom H, Pasternak B, Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Sundstrom K, Fink K, Hviid A. Quadrivalent HPV vaccination and risk of multiple sclerosis and other demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system. JAMA. 2015 Jan 6;313(1):54-61. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.16946.
PubMed 25562266Ojha RP, Jackson BE, Tota JE, Offutt-Powell TN, Singh KP, Bae S. Guillain-Barre syndrome following quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccination among vaccine-eligible individuals in the United States. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10(1):232-7. doi: 10.4161/hv.26292. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
PubMed 24013368Klein NP, Hansen J, Chao C, Velicer C, Emery M, Slezak J, Lewis N, Deosaransingh K, Sy L, Ackerson B, Cheetham TC, Liaw KL, Takhar H, Jacobsen SJ. Safety of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine administered routinely to females. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012 Dec;166(12):1140-8. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1451.
PubMed 23027469Pedersen C, Petaja T, Strauss G, Rumke HC, Poder A, Richardus JH, Spiessens B, Descamps D, Hardt K, Lehtinen M, Dubin G; HPV Vaccine Adolescent Study Investigators Network. Immunization of early adolescent females with human papillomavirus type 16 and 18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine containing AS04 adjuvant. J Adolesc Health. 2007 Jun;40(6):564-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.02.015.
PubMed 17531764Reisinger KS, Block SL, Lazcano-Ponce E, Samakoses R, Esser MT, Erick J, Puchalski D, Giacoletti KE, Sings HL, Lukac S, Alvarez FB, Barr E. Safety and persistent immunogenicity of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus types 6, 11, 16, 18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine in preadolescents and adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2007 Mar;26(3):201-9. doi: 10.1097/01.inf.0000253970.29190.5a.
PubMed 17484215Baandrup L, Blomberg M, Dehlendorff C, Sand C, Andersen KK, Kjaer SK. Significant decrease in the incidence of genital warts in young Danish women after implementation of a national human papillomavirus vaccination program. Sex Transm Dis. 2013 Feb;40(2):130-5. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31827bd66b.
PubMed 23324976Ali H, Donovan B, Wand H, Read TR, Regan DG, Grulich AE, Fairley CK, Guy RJ. Genital warts in young Australians five years into national human papillomavirus vaccination programme: national surveillance data. BMJ. 2013 Apr 18;346:f2032. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2032.
PubMed 23599298Ali H, Guy RJ, Wand H, Read TR, Regan DG, Grulich AE, Fairley CK, Donovan B. Decline in in-patient treatments of genital warts among young Australians following the national HPV vaccination program. BMC Infect Dis. 2013 Mar 18;13:140. doi: 10.1186/1471-2334-13-140.
PubMed 23506489Elam-Evans LD, Yankey D, Jeyarajah J, Singleton JA, Curtis RC, MacNeil J, Hariri S; Immunization Services Division, National Center for Immunization and Respiratory Diseases; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). National, regional, state, and selected local area vaccination coverage among adolescents aged 13-17 years--United States, 2013. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2014 Jul 25;63(29):625-33.
PubMed 25055186Brewer NT, Gottlieb SL, Reiter PL, McRee AL, Liddon N, Markowitz L, Smith JS. Longitudinal predictors of human papillomavirus vaccine initiation among adolescent girls in a high-risk geographic area. Sex Transm Dis. 2011 Mar;38(3):197-204. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e3181f12dbf.
PubMed 20838362
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 May 2016. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Use of a Patient Education/Messaging Platform to Increase Uptake and Series Completion of the HPV Vaccine
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02546752
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Merck - 20
- Conditions
- Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 16, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 18, Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 6, Cervical Cancer
- Phase
- Early Phase 1
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 1,306 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Regenstrief Institute, Inc.University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Merck Sharp & Dohme LLC
- Study start
- Sep 2015
- Primary completion
- May 2016 (actual)
- Study completion
- May 2016 (actual)
- First posted
- 11 Sep 2015 (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.
This primary goal of this study is to assess whether patient whose parents watch a standardized digital video using the integrated digital approach during a routine office visit are more likely to accept a dose of HPV vaccine (1st, 2nd, or 3rd dose) compared to those not completing the program. The study team anticipates eligible patients in the intervention clinics to have higher rates of HPV vaccine acceptance (1st, 2nd, or 3rd doses) than patients in the usual care comparison clinics.
Additionally, the study team is interested in determining the impact of the integrated system on clinical workflow by measuring the number of minutes of each patient office visit when using the system compared to the number of minutes of each visit in offices where the system is not used.
Although this is a descriptive/exploratory aim, our expectation is that the THEO system will have minimal impact on patient flow.
Detailed description
Brief Summary of Design: This is a 2-arm randomized study, with randomization occurring at the level of clinic. Five clinics will be included (2 implementing the THEO video; 3 providing usual care). All five clinics have been using the Child Health Improvement through Computer Automation System (CHICA) for several years. The evaluation phase of the study will last for approximately 6-7 months.
The CHICA System
The Child Health Improvement through Computer Automation system (CHICA) is a computer based decision support system that operates as a front end to the electronic medical record system (EMR). When a child is registered in the clinic, the registration system sends an HL7 ADT (registration) message to CHICA. In response, CHICA requests a download of the patient's record from the EMR. CHICA applies a rule base consisting of hundreds of Arden Syntax rules to the data in the record to select 20 yes/no questions that are displayed on an electronic tablet. The family answers the questions and returns the tablet to the medical assistant who enters the child's height, weight and other measurements onto another page on the tablet.
At the same time that CHICA produces the questions for family, it sends an HL7 request to CHIRP, the Indiana immunization registry. In response, CHICA receives a download of the child's immunization record. The download includes CHIRP's "forecast" of the immunizations for which the patient is due.
At the end of these processes, CHICA produces several paper documents. The first is the physician worksheet (PWS). The PWS includes up to six alerts and reminders for the physician. The reminders are selected by CHICA, using its Arden Syntax rule set based on the patient's EMR and answers provided on the tablet. Each alert has up to six check boxes with which the physician can document how s/he responded to the alert. The PWS, when completed, is scanned, the coded data corresponding to the check boxes are stored, and text is written into the physician's note in the medical record. CHICA may also produce any of a large number of handouts for helping the physician with assessment or patient education. CHICA also produces a summary of the patient's immunization history as well and advice on what shots the child is due to receive.
In an ongoing study of the Regenstrief-Merck collaboration, the investigators are studying the effect of providing physicians with a suggested "script" for recommending HPV vaccination to eligible patients' families. The study randomizes by physician whether the script is provided or whether the physician receives a simple reminder.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| THEO Video Arm | Experimental | Other: THEOTHEO is interactive patient engagement software that runs on an iPad tablet platform (developed by Noble.MD). Two programs have been developed. Parents/guardians of children who have not received the first HPV vaccine, will first assess whether the family has already decided in favor of the HPV vaccine or if they would like more information. The parent/guardian will be shown a video specific to where they are in the decision-making process. After completion, the THEO system will then ask the parent/guardian a series of Post Video questions. Parents/guardians of children who have received the first or second vaccine in the series, will emphasize the need to make the first vaccine "count". Pre and post video questions have been developed. |
| Usual Care Arm | No intervention | –This arm will receive usual care. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 11 to 17 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Parents/legal guardians of 11-17 year old children.
- Children receive their healthcare at one of the 5 CHICA clinics.
- Parents are able to read either English or Spanish.
- Children have received no more than 2 doses of HPV vaccine
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Parents will be excluded if their child is outside of the designated age range of 11-17 years, if the child has completed the 3-dose HPV vaccine series, or if the parent does not read either English or Spanish.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| THEOTHEO is interactive patient engagement software that runs on an iPad tablet platform (developed by Noble.MD). THEO is the intervention in this study. | Other | THEO Video Arm |
Primary outcome
Outcome Measure 1: Difference Between Average HPV Vaccine Series Initiation and Completion Rates
Time frame: Seven Months
Difference between average HPV vaccine series initiation and completion rates (as recorded in the CHIRP immunization registry) between sites using THEO integrated technology product compared to HPV Vaccination rates at Eskenazi sites not using THEO integrated technology product. Note that CHICA operates in 5 clinics in the Eskenazi Health Network. These clinics have been matched into two groups, each with 2 clinics, based on race and ethnicity of their patients. We will randomly assign one of these two groups to use THEO. The other group plus an additional CHICA clinic will continue to use CHICA without THEO.
1 secondary outcome
Outcome Measure 1: Relative Difference in Time of Appointment
Time frame: Seven Months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 May 2016.
- Background: PubMed 16949997Parkin DM, Bray F. Chapter 2: The burden of HPV-related cancers. Vaccine. 2006 Aug 31;24 Suppl 3:S3/11-25. doi: 10.1016/j.vaccine.2006.05.111.
- Background: PubMed 20138345Giuliano AR, Anic G, Nyitray AG. Epidemiology and pathology of HPV disease in males. Gynecol Oncol. 2010 May;117(2 Suppl):S15-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2010.01.026. Epub 2010 Feb 6.
- Background: PubMed 20307840Chaturvedi AK. Beyond cervical cancer: burden of other HPV-related cancers among men and women. J Adolesc Health. 2010 Apr;46(4 Suppl):S20-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2010.01.016.
- Background: PubMed 22018560Haupt RM, Sings HL. The efficacy and safety of the quadrivalent human papillomavirus 6/11/16/18 vaccine gardasil. J Adolesc Health. 2011 Nov;49(5):467-75. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2011.07.003. Epub 2011 Sep 9.
- Background: PubMed 24108159Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Pasternak B, Svanstrom H, Sparen P, Hviid A. Autoimmune, neurological, and venous thromboembolic adverse events after immunisation of adolescent girls with quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine in Denmark and Sweden: cohort study. BMJ. 2013 Oct 9;347:f5906. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f5906.
- Background: PubMed 25562266Scheller NM, Svanstrom H, Pasternak B, Arnheim-Dahlstrom L, Sundstrom K, Fink K, Hviid A. Quadrivalent HPV vaccination and risk of multiple sclerosis and other demyelinating diseases of the central nervous system. JAMA. 2015 Jan 6;313(1):54-61. doi: 10.1001/jama.2014.16946.
- Background: PubMed 24013368Ojha RP, Jackson BE, Tota JE, Offutt-Powell TN, Singh KP, Bae S. Guillain-Barre syndrome following quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccination among vaccine-eligible individuals in the United States. Hum Vaccin Immunother. 2014;10(1):232-7. doi: 10.4161/hv.26292. Epub 2013 Sep 6.
- Background: PubMed 23027469Klein NP, Hansen J, Chao C, Velicer C, Emery M, Slezak J, Lewis N, Deosaransingh K, Sy L, Ackerson B, Cheetham TC, Liaw KL, Takhar H, Jacobsen SJ. Safety of quadrivalent human papillomavirus vaccine administered routinely to females. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012 Dec;166(12):1140-8. doi: 10.1001/archpediatrics.2012.1451.
- Background: PubMed 17531764Pedersen C, Petaja T, Strauss G, Rumke HC, Poder A, Richardus JH, Spiessens B, Descamps D, Hardt K, Lehtinen M, Dubin G; HPV Vaccine Adolescent Study Investigators Network. Immunization of early adolescent females with human papillomavirus type 16 and 18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine containing AS04 adjuvant. J Adolesc Health. 2007 Jun;40(6):564-71. doi: 10.1016/j.jadohealth.2007.02.015.
- Background: PubMed 17484215Reisinger KS, Block SL, Lazcano-Ponce E, Samakoses R, Esser MT, Erick J, Puchalski D, Giacoletti KE, Sings HL, Lukac S, Alvarez FB, Barr E. Safety and persistent immunogenicity of a quadrivalent human papillomavirus types 6, 11, 16, 18 L1 virus-like particle vaccine in preadolescents and adolescents: a randomized controlled trial. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 2007 Mar;26(3):201-9. doi: 10.1097/01.inf.0000253970.29190.5a.
- Background: PubMed 23324976Baandrup L, Blomberg M, Dehlendorff C, Sand C, Andersen KK, Kjaer SK. Significant decrease in the incidence of genital warts in young Danish women after implementation of a national human papillomavirus vaccination program. Sex Transm Dis. 2013 Feb;40(2):130-5. doi: 10.1097/OLQ.0b013e31827bd66b.
- Background: PubMed 23599298Ali H, Donovan B, Wand H, Read TR, Regan DG, Grulich AE, Fairley CK, Guy RJ. Genital warts in young Australians five years into national human papillomavirus vaccination programme: national surveillance data. BMJ. 2013 Apr 18;346:f2032. doi: 10.1136/bmj.f2032.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Individual provider data will not be shared.
Related trials for Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11
RecruitingPhase 4
Lot-to-Lot Consistency Clinical Trial of Recombinant Human Papillomavirus 9-valent (Types 6/11/16/18/31/33/45/52/58) Vaccine (Escherichia Coli)
Infection by Human Papilloma Virus
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Plateau Antibody Levels of a Recombinant (E.Coli) HPV Nonavalent Vaccine Versus Gardasil®9 in Young Women
Cervical Cancer, Condylomata Acuminata
RecruitingObservational study
Immune Persistence After the Whole Vaccination Shcedule With Recombination Quadrivalent HPV Vaccine
HPV Infections, Cervical Cancer Stage IIa
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.
Gregory D Zimet, PhD principal investigator
317-274-8812
5 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Early Phase 1 study testing THEO in people with Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 11 and Human Papilloma Virus Infection Type 16, run by Regenstrief Institute, Inc. at 5 sites 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 4 inclusion and 1 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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 May 2016. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 5 sites 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.
What does this phase mean?
Early Phase 1 (sometimes called Phase 0) studies give a very small amount of a treatment to a few people, mainly to see how the body handles it.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Outcome Measure 1: Difference Between Average HPV Vaccine Series Initiation and Completion Rates (time frame: Seven Months). 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 NCT02546752, which also lists 33 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 25 May 2016.