Cervical CancerNCT03514459
Testing an Implementation Science Tool to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Mombasa, Kenya
A study testing Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach in people with Cervical Cancer, run by University of Washington at 1 site in Kenya.
Trial summary
Cervical cancer is the most common cancer in women in sub-Saharan Africa, and the majority of cervical cancer mortality occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Many of the disparities between high and LMICs are attributed to differences in screening. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Cervical Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 20 participants
- Where
- 1 siteKenya
- Study dates
- 29 Jan 2020to 31 Dec 2023
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- All FP clinics that receive County-supplied FP products will be eligible to participate.
- Any FP clinic manager that is 18 years and older is eligible to be interviewed.
Who cannot join
- Any clinic that is expected to be closed during part or all of the SAIA intervention period will be excluded. Any FP clinic that was previously included in the FP HIV SAIA trial will be excluded.
- FP clinic managers and staff:
- These clinic managers can be male or female.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Randomized Controlled Trial of an Implementation Science Tool to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Mombasa, Kenya
Cervical cancer is the most common cancer in women in sub-Saharan Africa, and the majority of cervical cancer mortality occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Many of the disparities between high and LMICs are attributed to differences in screening. Kenyan guidelines recommend screening with visual inspection methods followed by treatment of pre-cancerous lesions with cryotherapy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP). Implementation of these are poor with only 14% of Kenyan women ever having been screened for cervical cancer as of 2014. To address this implementation gap, this application proposes three aims. In Aim 1, the investigators will describe the cervical cancer screening care cascade, from identification of female clients age 21-65 years old, through referral for follow-up of clients with positive or suspicious screens, in family planning (FP) clinics in Mombasa County. Following characterization of this cascade, an analysis will be conducted of correlates of failure to screen for cervical cancer in FP clients seen over a one-year period in Mombasa County. Aim 2 will test whether SAIA increases cervical cancer screening compared to usual procedures in a cluster randomized trial in 20 FP clinics in Mombasa County. Finally, in Aim 3, the investigators will determine the cost and budget impact of using SAIA to increase cervical cancer screening in FP clinics in Mombasa County. The results of this study have the potential to improve cervical cancer screening, and inform policy in the Mombasa DOH for a fiscally responsible evidenced-based approach for cervical cancer screening. The long-term goal is to decrease cervical cancer mortality and improve women's health.
Read the detailed description
Specific Aims Eighty-seven percent of cervical cancer deaths worldwide occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs) and cervical cancer is the most common cancer in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) (1-4). The significant disparity between cervical cancer outcomes in the United States and LMICs is largely attributed to differences in screening (5). While approximately 89% of US women receive cervical cancer screening (7), less than 5% of women in LMICs have been screened (4). Barriers to screening in LMICs include challenges with infrastructure to support screening, competing health interests, lack of education, low health literacy, and poverty (2, 8-12).
In addition to the general lack of cervical cancer screening, SSA carries the highest global burden of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Women account for 59% of all people living with HIV (13) and cervical cancer incidence is higher in women with HIV (14). With the advent of antiretroviral therapy (ART), women receiving HIV treatment have increased life expectancy approaching that of HIV-negative women (15). However, cervical cancer rates do not significantly decline despite ART and immune reconstitution (16), and invasive cervical cancer incidence remains high even with ART (17). The aging population of HIV-positive women will continue to face a large lifetime risk of cervical cancer (18).
Because of the burden of both cervical cancer and HIV infection in SSA, improving implementation of cervical cancer screening and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions in this region is critical. Existing methods for cervical cancer screening include cytology, human papillomavirus testing (14), and visual inspection methods (19). Pairing screening with treatment of positive screens using cryotherapy or loop electrosurgical excision procedures (LEEP) could prevent progression to cervical cancer (20), and greatly reduce morbidity and mortality in women. To address this implementation gap, simple, scalable, and sustainable interventions are imperative to improve screening and treatment of pre-cancers. The Kenyan Ministry of Health (MOH) guidelines stress the need to strengthen capacity, streamline, and standardize screening, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer (21). To achieve this, our long-term partners in the Mombasa County Department of Health (DOH) are eager to increase rates of cervical cancer screening. The investigators aim to test an implementation science methodology, Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA), to address systems barriers to screening and provide quality improvement while relying on existing infrastructure to conduct screening. Rather than directly offering screening, this intervention aims to support systematic improvements in screening processes in facilities throughout the county. The investigators propose a collaborative research project with Mombasa County to achieve the following specific aims:
AIM 1:To describe the cervical cancer screening care cascade, from identification of female clients age 21-65 years old, through referral for follow-up of clients with positive or suspicious screens, in family planning (FP) clinics in Mombasa County. Following characterization of this cascade, we will conduct an analysis of correlates of failure to screen for cervical cancer in FP clients seen over a one-year period.
HYP 1: While many FP clinics are capable of providing cervical cancer screening, the majority of clients are not screened appropriately. Failure to screen for cervical cancer will be associated with both patient-level (e.g. age) and clinic-level (e.g. resources available) factors.
AIM 2: To test whether SAIA increases cervical cancer screening compared to usual procedures in a cluster randomized trial in 20 FP clinics in Mombasa County.
HYP 2: Family planning clinics randomized to SAIA will have increased rates of cervical cancer screening by modifying bottlenecks in screening processes compared to clinics randomized to usual procedures.
AIM 3: To determine the cost and budget impact of using SAIA to increase cervical cancer screening in FP clinics in Mombasa County.
Expected Outcomes and Public Health Impact As one of the leading causes of cancer mortality in African women, immediate attention to increase rates of cervical cancer screening and treatment of pre-cancers is crucial. This implementation tool holds potential for addressing gaps in cervical cancer prevention and lowering cancer morbidity and mortality. Use of the reproducible SAIA methodology could provide a template for broader rollout of cervical cancer screening throughout the country and region. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide the evaluation of this intervention will provide insight about the potential generalizability of the intervention, and improve the likelihood of its successful implementation in diverse settings (22).
The proposed aims will provide valuable training in key competencies in implementation research, with measurable and objective indicators of success in skills building and career development. The proposal leverages exceptional resources at the University of Washington (UW) and our longstanding and productive partnership with multiple institutions in Kenya (see letters from Mombasa County DOH, University of Nairobi, Kenyatta National Hospital) to facilitate Dr. Eastment's career advancement.
- Conditions
- Cervical Cancer
- Being tested
- Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach
- 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.
Systems Analysis and Improvement ApproachOther
Also called (SAIA)
SAIA has five steps. The first step uses an Excel-based tool to quantify drop- offs, or people who did not progress, in each step of a process (Figure 1). This tool also allows the user to see the downstream effect when improving one step in the cascade, and holding the other steps constant. Step 2 involves process flow mapping with clinic staff to identify modifiable bottlenecks in the process. Step 3 develops and implements a workflow modification to address a bottleneck identified in step 2 (continuous quality improvement [CQI] step). Step 4 assesses impact of the modification and recalculates the cascade analysis in step 1 (CQI step). Step 5 repeats the cycle for CQI. SAIA draws from systems engineering in the Toyota Production Systems and from research in LMICs. Studies in quality improvement in LMICs highlight that CQI processes led to more sustainable, effective, and appropriate interventions (42-44).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | Control clinics: Clinics randomized to the control arm will continue usual procedures. Periodic evaluation of cervical cancer screening rates will be examined every 3 months using FP register data. |
| Intervention with SAIA | Experimental | Clinics randomized to the intervention arm will be introduced to the five steps of SAIA by study staff. The cascade analysis will be performed within the FP clinic to identify drop-offs in cervical cancer screening and referrals, using an Excel-based tool adapted from previous SAIA trials. Flow mapping performed by clinic and study staff will describe the cervical cancer screening process including who the client interacts with, timing of these interactions, any cervical cancer screening performed, and any referrals made. Initial drafts will be reviewed together with clinic and study stuff to ensure adequate and complete representations of processes. Study staff will work with clinic staff to identify bottlenecks in the process and potential solutions to improve flow. Proposed solutions will be implemented, and the process will be examined again to determine the effect of the implemented changes. The cycle will be repeated approximately every 6-8 weeks during the RCT. Receives: Other: Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Cervical Cancer Screening
Proportion of all FP clients aged 21-65 years who were screened for cervical cancer over the total number of eligible clients
Measured: Aggregated data across 18 months, individual participants were not followed over time.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 May 2018
- Study start29 Jan 2020
- Primary completion31 Jul 2021
- Study completion31 Dec 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Cervical CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of WashingtonThe 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
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- Cluster randomized trial of family planning clinics
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Washington
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, McKenna Eastment, University of Washington
- Investigators
- McKenna C Eastment, MD, Principal investigator, University of Washington
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03514459
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- STUDY00004431
- Other IDs
- 1K08CA228761
- Status last verified
- May 2024
- First submitted
- 19 Apr 2018
- Last updated
- 22 May 2024
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: Data from this study will be available upon request after publication of the main study manuscripts. A standard approach will be followed for data sharing. Researchers requesting access to data will need to first submit a request in writing describing their qualifications, local IRB approval for the planned analyses, statistical analysis plans, and plans to secure the confidentiality and safety of the data. They will be required to agree, in writing, that they will not share the data with others, will use it only for the research purpose(s) delineated, and will return or destroy the data upon completion. All data will be de-identified. Approval from the Kenyatta National Hospital-University of Nairobi Ethics and Research Committee (KNH-UON ERC) will also be required to have access to any data.
Publications
Eastment MC, Wanje G, Richardson BA, Mwaringa E, Patta S, Sherr K, Barnabas RV, Mandaliya K, Jaoko W, Mcclelland RS. Results of a cluster randomized trial testing the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to increase cervical cancer screening in family planning clinics in Mombasa County, Kenya. Implement Sci. 2023 Nov 27;18(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01322-y.
PubMed 38012647
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 22 May 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Randomized Controlled Trial of an Implementation Science Tool to Increase Cervical Cancer Screening in Mombasa, Kenya
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03514459
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- STUDY00004431
- Conditions
- Cervical Cancer
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 20 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of WashingtonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)
- Study start
- 29 Jan 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Jul 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Dec 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 May 2018 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 22 May 2024
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
Cervical cancer is the most common cancer in women in sub-Saharan Africa, and the majority of cervical cancer mortality occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs). Many of the disparities between high and LMICs are attributed to differences in screening. Kenyan guidelines recommend screening with visual inspection methods followed by treatment of pre-cancerous lesions with cryotherapy and loop electrosurgical excision procedure (LEEP). Implementation of these are poor with only 14% of Kenyan women ever having been screened for cervical cancer as of 2014. To address this implementation gap, this application proposes three aims. In Aim 1, the investigators will describe the cervical cancer screening care cascade, from identification of female clients age 21-65 years old, through referral for follow-up of clients with positive or suspicious screens, in family planning (FP) clinics in Mombasa County. Following characterization of this cascade, an analysis will be conducted of correlates of failure to screen for cervical cancer in FP clients seen over a one-year period in Mombasa County. Aim 2 will test whether SAIA increases cervical cancer screening compared to usual procedures in a cluster randomized trial in 20 FP clinics in Mombasa County. Finally, in Aim 3, the investigators will determine the cost and budget impact of using SAIA to increase cervical cancer screening in FP clinics in Mombasa County. The results of this study have the potential to improve cervical cancer screening, and inform policy in the Mombasa DOH for a fiscally responsible evidenced-based approach for cervical cancer screening. The long-term goal is to decrease cervical cancer mortality and improve women's health.
Detailed description
Specific Aims Eighty-seven percent of cervical cancer deaths worldwide occur in low and middle income countries (LMICs) and cervical cancer is the most common cancer in sub-Saharan Africa (SSA) (1-4). The significant disparity between cervical cancer outcomes in the United States and LMICs is largely attributed to differences in screening (5). While approximately 89% of US women receive cervical cancer screening (7), less than 5% of women in LMICs have been screened (4). Barriers to screening in LMICs include challenges with infrastructure to support screening, competing health interests, lack of education, low health literacy, and poverty (2, 8-12).
In addition to the general lack of cervical cancer screening, SSA carries the highest global burden of human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) infection. Women account for 59% of all people living with HIV (13) and cervical cancer incidence is higher in women with HIV (14). With the advent of antiretroviral therapy (ART), women receiving HIV treatment have increased life expectancy approaching that of HIV-negative women (15). However, cervical cancer rates do not significantly decline despite ART and immune reconstitution (16), and invasive cervical cancer incidence remains high even with ART (17). The aging population of HIV-positive women will continue to face a large lifetime risk of cervical cancer (18).
Because of the burden of both cervical cancer and HIV infection in SSA, improving implementation of cervical cancer screening and treatment of pre-cancerous lesions in this region is critical. Existing methods for cervical cancer screening include cytology, human papillomavirus testing (14), and visual inspection methods (19). Pairing screening with treatment of positive screens using cryotherapy or loop electrosurgical excision procedures (LEEP) could prevent progression to cervical cancer (20), and greatly reduce morbidity and mortality in women. To address this implementation gap, simple, scalable, and sustainable interventions are imperative to improve screening and treatment of pre-cancers. The Kenyan Ministry of Health (MOH) guidelines stress the need to strengthen capacity, streamline, and standardize screening, diagnosis, and treatment of cancer (21). To achieve this, our long-term partners in the Mombasa County Department of Health (DOH) are eager to increase rates of cervical cancer screening. The investigators aim to test an implementation science methodology, Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach (SAIA), to address systems barriers to screening and provide quality improvement while relying on existing infrastructure to conduct screening. Rather than directly offering screening, this intervention aims to support systematic improvements in screening processes in facilities throughout the county. The investigators propose a collaborative research project with Mombasa County to achieve the following specific aims:
AIM 1:To describe the cervical cancer screening care cascade, from identification of female clients age 21-65 years old, through referral for follow-up of clients with positive or suspicious screens, in family planning (FP) clinics in Mombasa County. Following characterization of this cascade, we will conduct an analysis of correlates of failure to screen for cervical cancer in FP clients seen over a one-year period.
HYP 1: While many FP clinics are capable of providing cervical cancer screening, the majority of clients are not screened appropriately. Failure to screen for cervical cancer will be associated with both patient-level (e.g. age) and clinic-level (e.g. resources available) factors.
AIM 2: To test whether SAIA increases cervical cancer screening compared to usual procedures in a cluster randomized trial in 20 FP clinics in Mombasa County.
HYP 2: Family planning clinics randomized to SAIA will have increased rates of cervical cancer screening by modifying bottlenecks in screening processes compared to clinics randomized to usual procedures.
AIM 3: To determine the cost and budget impact of using SAIA to increase cervical cancer screening in FP clinics in Mombasa County.
Expected Outcomes and Public Health Impact As one of the leading causes of cancer mortality in African women, immediate attention to increase rates of cervical cancer screening and treatment of pre-cancers is crucial. This implementation tool holds potential for addressing gaps in cervical cancer prevention and lowering cancer morbidity and mortality. Use of the reproducible SAIA methodology could provide a template for broader rollout of cervical cancer screening throughout the country and region. Using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) to guide the evaluation of this intervention will provide insight about the potential generalizability of the intervention, and improve the likelihood of its successful implementation in diverse settings (22).
The proposed aims will provide valuable training in key competencies in implementation research, with measurable and objective indicators of success in skills building and career development. The proposal leverages exceptional resources at the University of Washington (UW) and our longstanding and productive partnership with multiple institutions in Kenya (see letters from Mombasa County DOH, University of Nairobi, Kenyatta National Hospital) to facilitate Dr. Eastment's career advancement.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Cluster randomized trial of family planning clinics
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Control | No intervention | –Control clinics: Clinics randomized to the control arm will continue usual procedures. Periodic evaluation of cervical cancer screening rates will be examined every 3 months using FP register data. |
| Intervention with SAIA | Experimental | Other: Systems Analysis and Improvement ApproachClinics randomized to the intervention arm will be introduced to the five steps of SAIA by study staff. The cascade analysis will be performed within the FP clinic to identify drop-offs in cervical cancer screening and referrals, using an Excel-based tool adapted from previous SAIA trials. Flow mapping performed by clinic and study staff will describe the cervical cancer screening process including who the client interacts with, timing of these interactions, any cervical cancer screening performed, and any referrals made. Initial drafts will be reviewed together with clinic and study stuff to ensure adequate and complete representations of processes. Study staff will work with clinic staff to identify bottlenecks in the process and potential solutions to improve flow. Proposed solutions will be implemented, and the process will be examined again to determine the effect of the implemented changes. The cycle will be repeated approximately every 6-8 weeks during the RCT. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- All FP clinics that receive County-supplied FP products will be eligible to participate.
- Any FP clinic manager that is 18 years and older is eligible to be interviewed.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Any clinic that is expected to be closed during part or all of the SAIA intervention period will be excluded. Any FP clinic that was previously included in the FP HIV SAIA trial will be excluded.
- These clinic managers can be male or female.
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Systems Analysis and Improvement ApproachAlso: (SAIA)SAIA has five steps. The first step uses an Excel-based tool to quantify drop- offs, or people who did not progress, in each step of a process (Figure 1). This tool also allows the user to see the downstream effect when improving one step in the cascade, and holding the other steps constant. Step 2 involves process flow mapping with clinic staff to identify modifiable bottlenecks in the process. Step 3 develops and implements a workflow modification to address a bottleneck identified in step 2 (continuous quality improvement [CQI] step). Step 4 assesses impact of the modification and recalculates the cascade analysis in step 1 (CQI step). Step 5 repeats the cycle for CQI. SAIA draws from systems engineering in the Toyota Production Systems and from research in LMICs. Studies in quality improvement in LMICs highlight that CQI processes led to more sustainable, effective, and appropriate interventions (42-44). | Other | Intervention with SAIA |
Primary outcome
Cervical Cancer Screening
Time frame: Aggregated data across 18 months, individual participants were not followed over time.
Proportion of all FP clients aged 21-65 years who were screened for cervical cancer over the total number of eligible clients
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 22 May 2024.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38012647Eastment MC, Wanje G, Richardson BA, Mwaringa E, Patta S, Sherr K, Barnabas RV, Mandaliya K, Jaoko W, Mcclelland RS. Results of a cluster randomized trial testing the Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach to increase cervical cancer screening in family planning clinics in Mombasa County, Kenya. Implement Sci. 2023 Nov 27;18(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s13012-023-01322-y.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. Data from this study will be available upon request after publication of the main study manuscripts. A standard approach will be followed for data sharing. Researchers requesting access to data will need to first submit a request in writing describing their qualifications, local IRB approval for the planned analyses, statistical analysis plans, and plans to secure the confidentiality and safety of the data. They will be required to agree, in writing, that they will not share the data with others, will use it only for the research purpose(s) delineated, and will return or destroy the data upon completion. All data will be de-identified. Approval from the Kenyatta National Hospital-University of Nairobi Ethics and Research Committee (KNH-UON ERC) will also be required to have access to any data.
Related trials for Cervical Cancer
RecruitingPhase 2
Adebrelimab ±Induction Chemotherapy Followed by Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy for Unresectable Locally Advanced ESCC
Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Immunotherapy
Recruiting
Feasibility of the "One-Finger Technique" for Identifying the Upper Left Ureter During Para-Aortic Lymphadenectomy
Ovary Cancer, Cervical Cancer
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Predictive Biomarkers for Precision Management of Pre-cancerous Cervical Neoplasia
HSIL, High Grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion, DNA Methylation
Active, not recruiting
Addressing Stigma in Screening and Diagnostic Delay for Cervical Cancer
Cervical Cancer Screening
RecruitingPhase 1/2
Docetaxel and SX-682 in Recurrent/Metastatic Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma, Salivary Gland Carcinoma, and Advanced Prostate Cancer
Head and Neck Cancer, Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma
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.
McKenna C Eastment, MD principal investigator
University of Washington
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Systems Analysis and Improvement Approach in people with Cervical Cancer, run by University of Washington at 1 site in Kenya.
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 2 inclusion and 3 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 22 May 2024. 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 Kenya. 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?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 22 May 2024). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Cervical Cancer Screening (time frame: Aggregated data across 18 months, individual participants were not followed over time.). 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 NCT03514459, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 22 May 2024.