Breast CancerPROSPECTSNCT03733106
Prospective Trial of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) in Breast Cancer Screening.
A study testing digital breast tomosynthesis and standard two dimension digital mammogram in people with Breast Cancer, run by King's College Hospital NHS Trust at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
The accuracy of standard two dimension digital mammography (2DDM) in breast cancer screening is limited because of superimposition of normal breast structures onto a two dimensional image. Mammography signs of breast cancer may be obscured, resulting in delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 50 to 70 years, women only
- Conditions the study is for
- Breast Cancer
- What is being tested?
- digital breast tomosynthesis and standard two dimension digital mammogram
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 100,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 17 Dec 2018to Jul 2024
- 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 50 to 70 years
- Women only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- women aged 50-70 years attending for routine breast cancer screening
Who cannot join
- women aged 47-49 and 71-73 invited to participate in the age extension trial
- women who are unable to give informed consent
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United Kingdom1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust
London
About this study
Official title: Prospective Randomized Trial of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) Plus Standard 2D Digital Mammography (2DDM) or Synthetic 2D Digital Mammography (S2D) Compared to Standard 2DDM in Breast Cancer Screening.
The accuracy of standard two dimension digital mammography (2DDM) in breast cancer screening is limited because of superimposition of normal breast structures onto a two dimensional image. Mammography signs of breast cancer may be obscured, resulting in delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Conversely, superimposition of normal tissues may produce features on mammography which are suspicious for cancer and lead to recall for further tests. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a new x ray mammography technique which provides three dimensional information to the film reader, overcoming many of the interpretation problems due to tissue superimposition. Studies of DBT + 2DDM in screening have shown increased cancer detection rates and lower false positive recall rates. There may be increased costs related to the technology and reading times.
The aim of this study is to measure the impact and cost effectiveness of DBT + 2DDM in routine screening compared to standard 2DDM.100,000 women wil be recruited using NHS BSP screening sites. At each site, through a clinic randomization process, half of the participants will undergo standard screening with 2DDM (the control group) and half will undergo screening using DBT+2DDM.
Read the detailed description
The accuracy of two view digital x-ray mammography (2DDM), the standard test for breast cancer screening, is limited because of the effect of superimposition of normal breast structures onto a two dimensional image. The mammography signs of breast cancer may be obscured, particularly in women with dense fibro glandular breast tissue, resulting in delay in diagnosis of cancer. National interval cancer data shows that up to 4000 women per annum (2.88 per 1000 screened) are diagnosed with breast cancer in the interval between screens. Conversely, superimposition of normal tissues may produce features on mammography which are suspicious for cancer and lead to unnecessary recall for further diagnostic tests. National screening data for 2012/2013 show that of 2.3 million women screened, 79000 (3.4%) without breast cancer were recalled to specialist diagnostic assessment clinics.
DBT is an x-ray mammography technique which involves acquiring multiple low dose projections over a limited angular range (less than 50 degrees). These projection images are reconstructed into a set of images consisting of parallel planes, typically 1mm apart throughout the breast. Three dimensional information is provided for the reader, overcoming many of the interpretation problems associated with 2DDM. Several studies have demonstrated improvement in the accuracy of DBT in the diagnostic setting. Published data from studies of DBT combined with 2DDM in screening have demonstrated increased rates of invasive cancer detection, cancers detected at a smaller size and decreased false positive recall rates. However, there may be increased costs associated with the technology, image data storage and longer reading time.
As a result of recent technical developments, a two dimensional mammography image can be produced by processing the tomosynthesis image data. Synthetic 2D (S2D) trial data show that the accuracy of DBT + S2D may be the same as that achieved with DBT + 2DDM.
The primary aim of this trial is to assess the impact of the addition of DBT to 2DDM in routine breast cancer screening compared to 2D mammography. 100 000 women will be recruited over twelve months using NHS screening sites with DBT ready mammography equipment. At each site, through a clinic randomisation process, half the trial participants will undergo standard 2DDM (the control group) and half will undergo 2DDM and DBT (the study group). Synthetic 2D images will be produced for all women in the intervention group. A secondary objective of the trial is to compare the accuracy of DBT + 2DDM with DBT + S2D. For each woman in the intervention group, one reader will view DBT + 2DDM, and the other reader will view DBT + S2D. This will enable a non-inferiority test to be applied to DBT + S2D vs DBT + 2DDM.
The investigators plan to use DBT in addition to 2DDM in the intervention group because:
- Most previous trials demonstrated increased sensitivity and specificity by using DBT in combination with 2D imaging rather than as a replacement.
- By using both 2D and DBT in the study group, the investigators will be able to review the display of the same cancer in the two techniques.
One concern about using DBT in conjunction with 2D imaging is the increase in radiation dose. The investigators conservatively estimate the mean glandular radiation dose of 4mGy in the control group and 9mGy in the study group. In other words, DBT imaging requires slightly more than double the dose of 2D imaging. A recent study of Yaffe \& Mainprize 2011 has shown that benefits of screening with mammography greatly exceed the detriment due to the radiation. Using similar calculations the investigators estimate that the ratio of lives saved and lost due to radiation in the 2DDM screening arm will be in the range 150-300 to 1. The higher dose in the study group is expected to lead to greater benefit and greater detriment. In order for the extra benefit to exceed the extra detriment of using DBT in the study group there will need to be a very small (0.45% to 0.9%) increase in lives saved. In practice the investigators expect a larger benefit that this.
- Health need: the effectiveness of 2DDM in detection of invasive breast cancer has improved over the last twenty years as demonstrated by a decrease in interval cancer rates (cancers occurring between routine three yearly screens). This improvement is a result of the introduction of two view mammography, digital mammography and improvements in film reading performance. However, the most recent published interval cancer rates of 2.85 per 1000 women screened demonstrates the limited sensitivity of 2DDM in cancer detection. Published data from studies of DBT and 2DDM in screening in Europe and North America demonstrate an increased invasive cancer detection rate of 40-48% compared to 2DDM alone. Data from this study will demonstrate whether such an improvement in sensitivity is achievable in the NHSBSP, whether cancers can be detected at a smaller size, and prognostic features of screen detected and interval cancers will be used to model whether there would be a greater reduction in breast cancer mortality from screening with 2DDM plus DBT compared to 2D alone. Data will also demonstrate the effect on false positive recalls in the NHSBSP. Published results show that this may be decreased by 15-20% with the use of DBT.
- Economic analysis: The study will demonstrate whether replacing standard 2DDM with DBT (and S2D) represents an efficient use of NHS resources, either because DBT reduces overall cost or because the additional health benefits of greater sensitivity and specificity justify the additional cost.
- Sustained interest: DBT may have a major impact on the effectiveness and the cost of screening. Data from this study will help decide the optimum strategy for using DBT in routine screening in the NHS.
- Development of research area: results from this study will help identify which groups of women will benefit from screening with DBT.
- Scientific knowledge: this study will advance our understanding of the effect of DBT on the characteristics of screen detected cancers, whether more biologically significant cancers are found when smaller and at an earlier stage, and whether more low grade cancers are diagnosed, increasing the problem of over diagnosis.
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Being tested
- digital breast tomosynthesis, standard two dimension digital mammogram
- Keywords
- screening, tomosynthesis
- Medical subject headings
- Breast Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
digital breast tomosynthesisDiagnostic test
pseudo three dimension mammography
standard two dimension digital mammogramDiagnostic test
standard two dimension mammogram
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| digital breast tomosynthesis | Experimental | Tomosynthesis and two dimension digital mammography Receives: Diagnostic Test: digital breast tomosynthesis |
| control | Active comparator | standard two dimension digital mammography Receives: Diagnostic Test: standard two dimension digital mammogram |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
To compare the cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis and 2DDM vs standard screening with 2DDM
To compare the effectiveness of breast cancer screening with DBT and 2D mammography with standard 2D mammography screening by measuring the internal cancer rate in women undergoing DBT and 2D mammography VS the interval cancer rate in women undergoing standard 2D mammography.
(Estimated interval cancer rates - intervention group 1.85/1000 screened; control group 2.85/1000 screened)
Measured: outcome measures to be reported from 2-7 years following beginning of recruitment into the trial
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Nov 2018
- Study start17 Dec 2018
- Primary completionJul 2024 (estimated)
- Study completionJul 2024 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Breast CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by King's College Hospital NHS TrustThe 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
- Prospective randomized controlled study
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 100,000 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- King's College Hospital NHS Trust
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Michael J Michell, FRCR, Principal investigator, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03733106
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 199080
- Acronym
- PROSPECTS
- Status last verified
- Nov 2019
- First submitted
- 10 Oct 2017
- Last updated
- 6 Nov 2019
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: There is no plan to make individual participant data available to individuals outside the research team
Publications
J W Partridge G, Darker I, J James J, Satchithananda K, Sharma N, Valencia A, Teh W, Khan H, Muscat E, J Michell M, Chen Y. How long does it take to read a mammogram? Investigating the reading time of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2024 Aug;177:111535. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111535. Epub 2024 May 29.
PubMed 38852330Partridge GJW, Taib AG, Phillips P, James JJ, Satchithananda K, Sharma N, Morel J, McAvinchey R, Valencia A, Teh W, Khan H, Muscat E, Michell MJ, Chen Y. Take a break: should breaks be enforced during digital breast tomosynthesis reading sessions? Eur Radiol. 2024 Feb;34(2):1388-1398. doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-10086-4. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
PubMed 37589906
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Nov 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Prospective Randomized Trial of Digital Breast Tomosynthesis (DBT) Plus Standard 2D Digital Mammography (2DDM) or Synthetic 2D Digital Mammography (S2D) Compared to Standard 2DDM in Breast Cancer Screening.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03733106
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- PROSPECTS / 199080
- Conditions
- Breast Cancer
- Keywords
- screening, tomosynthesis
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 100,000 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- King's College Hospital NHS TrustUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 17 Dec 2018 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Jul 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Jul 2024 (estimated)
- First posted
- 7 Nov 2018 (actual)
- 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.
The accuracy of standard two dimension digital mammography (2DDM) in breast cancer screening is limited because of superimposition of normal breast structures onto a two dimensional image. Mammography signs of breast cancer may be obscured, resulting in delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer. Conversely, superimposition of normal tissues may produce features on mammography which are suspicious for cancer and lead to recall for further tests. Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) is a new x ray mammography technique which provides three dimensional information to the film reader, overcoming many of the interpretation problems due to tissue superimposition. Studies of DBT + 2DDM in screening have shown increased cancer detection rates and lower false positive recall rates. There may be increased costs related to the technology and reading times.
The aim of this study is to measure the impact and cost effectiveness of DBT + 2DDM in routine screening compared to standard 2DDM.100,000 women wil be recruited using NHS BSP screening sites. At each site, through a clinic randomization process, half of the participants will undergo standard screening with 2DDM (the control group) and half will undergo screening using DBT+2DDM.
Detailed description
The accuracy of two view digital x-ray mammography (2DDM), the standard test for breast cancer screening, is limited because of the effect of superimposition of normal breast structures onto a two dimensional image. The mammography signs of breast cancer may be obscured, particularly in women with dense fibro glandular breast tissue, resulting in delay in diagnosis of cancer. National interval cancer data shows that up to 4000 women per annum (2.88 per 1000 screened) are diagnosed with breast cancer in the interval between screens. Conversely, superimposition of normal tissues may produce features on mammography which are suspicious for cancer and lead to unnecessary recall for further diagnostic tests. National screening data for 2012/2013 show that of 2.3 million women screened, 79000 (3.4%) without breast cancer were recalled to specialist diagnostic assessment clinics.
DBT is an x-ray mammography technique which involves acquiring multiple low dose projections over a limited angular range (less than 50 degrees). These projection images are reconstructed into a set of images consisting of parallel planes, typically 1mm apart throughout the breast. Three dimensional information is provided for the reader, overcoming many of the interpretation problems associated with 2DDM. Several studies have demonstrated improvement in the accuracy of DBT in the diagnostic setting. Published data from studies of DBT combined with 2DDM in screening have demonstrated increased rates of invasive cancer detection, cancers detected at a smaller size and decreased false positive recall rates. However, there may be increased costs associated with the technology, image data storage and longer reading time.
As a result of recent technical developments, a two dimensional mammography image can be produced by processing the tomosynthesis image data. Synthetic 2D (S2D) trial data show that the accuracy of DBT + S2D may be the same as that achieved with DBT + 2DDM.
The primary aim of this trial is to assess the impact of the addition of DBT to 2DDM in routine breast cancer screening compared to 2D mammography. 100 000 women will be recruited over twelve months using NHS screening sites with DBT ready mammography equipment. At each site, through a clinic randomisation process, half the trial participants will undergo standard 2DDM (the control group) and half will undergo 2DDM and DBT (the study group). Synthetic 2D images will be produced for all women in the intervention group. A secondary objective of the trial is to compare the accuracy of DBT + 2DDM with DBT + S2D. For each woman in the intervention group, one reader will view DBT + 2DDM, and the other reader will view DBT + S2D. This will enable a non-inferiority test to be applied to DBT + S2D vs DBT + 2DDM.
The investigators plan to use DBT in addition to 2DDM in the intervention group because:
- Most previous trials demonstrated increased sensitivity and specificity by using DBT in combination with 2D imaging rather than as a replacement.
- By using both 2D and DBT in the study group, the investigators will be able to review the display of the same cancer in the two techniques.
One concern about using DBT in conjunction with 2D imaging is the increase in radiation dose. The investigators conservatively estimate the mean glandular radiation dose of 4mGy in the control group and 9mGy in the study group. In other words, DBT imaging requires slightly more than double the dose of 2D imaging. A recent study of Yaffe \& Mainprize 2011 has shown that benefits of screening with mammography greatly exceed the detriment due to the radiation. Using similar calculations the investigators estimate that the ratio of lives saved and lost due to radiation in the 2DDM screening arm will be in the range 150-300 to 1. The higher dose in the study group is expected to lead to greater benefit and greater detriment. In order for the extra benefit to exceed the extra detriment of using DBT in the study group there will need to be a very small (0.45% to 0.9%) increase in lives saved. In practice the investigators expect a larger benefit that this.
- Health need: the effectiveness of 2DDM in detection of invasive breast cancer has improved over the last twenty years as demonstrated by a decrease in interval cancer rates (cancers occurring between routine three yearly screens). This improvement is a result of the introduction of two view mammography, digital mammography and improvements in film reading performance. However, the most recent published interval cancer rates of 2.85 per 1000 women screened demonstrates the limited sensitivity of 2DDM in cancer detection. Published data from studies of DBT and 2DDM in screening in Europe and North America demonstrate an increased invasive cancer detection rate of 40-48% compared to 2DDM alone. Data from this study will demonstrate whether such an improvement in sensitivity is achievable in the NHSBSP, whether cancers can be detected at a smaller size, and prognostic features of screen detected and interval cancers will be used to model whether there would be a greater reduction in breast cancer mortality from screening with 2DDM plus DBT compared to 2D alone. Data will also demonstrate the effect on false positive recalls in the NHSBSP. Published results show that this may be decreased by 15-20% with the use of DBT.
- Economic analysis: The study will demonstrate whether replacing standard 2DDM with DBT (and S2D) represents an efficient use of NHS resources, either because DBT reduces overall cost or because the additional health benefits of greater sensitivity and specificity justify the additional cost.
- Sustained interest: DBT may have a major impact on the effectiveness and the cost of screening. Data from this study will help decide the optimum strategy for using DBT in routine screening in the NHS.
- Development of research area: results from this study will help identify which groups of women will benefit from screening with DBT.
- Scientific knowledge: this study will advance our understanding of the effect of DBT on the characteristics of screen detected cancers, whether more biologically significant cancers are found when smaller and at an earlier stage, and whether more low grade cancers are diagnosed, increasing the problem of over diagnosis.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Screening
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- Prospective randomized controlled study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| digital breast tomosynthesis | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: digital breast tomosynthesisTomosynthesis and two dimension digital mammography |
| control | Active comparator | Diagnostic Test: standard two dimension digital mammogramstandard two dimension digital mammography |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 50 to 70 years
- Sex
- Female only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- women aged 50-70 years attending for routine breast cancer screening
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- women aged 47-49 and 71-73 invited to participate in the age extension trial
- women who are unable to give informed consent
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 |
|---|---|---|
| digital breast tomosynthesispseudo three dimension mammography | Diagnostic test | digital breast tomosynthesis |
| standard two dimension digital mammogramstandard two dimension mammogram | Diagnostic test | control |
Primary outcome
To compare the cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis and 2DDM vs standard screening with 2DDM
Time frame: outcome measures to be reported from 2-7 years following beginning of recruitment into the trial
To compare the effectiveness of breast cancer screening with DBT and 2D mammography with standard 2D mammography screening by measuring the internal cancer rate in women undergoing DBT and 2D mammography VS the interval cancer rate in women undergoing standard 2D mammography. (Estimated interval cancer rates - intervention group 1.85/1000 screened; control group 2.85/1000 screened)
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Nov 2019.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 38852330J W Partridge G, Darker I, J James J, Satchithananda K, Sharma N, Valencia A, Teh W, Khan H, Muscat E, J Michell M, Chen Y. How long does it take to read a mammogram? Investigating the reading time of digital breast tomosynthesis and digital mammography. Eur J Radiol. 2024 Aug;177:111535. doi: 10.1016/j.ejrad.2024.111535. Epub 2024 May 29.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 37589906Partridge GJW, Taib AG, Phillips P, James JJ, Satchithananda K, Sharma N, Morel J, McAvinchey R, Valencia A, Teh W, Khan H, Muscat E, Michell MJ, Chen Y. Take a break: should breaks be enforced during digital breast tomosynthesis reading sessions? Eur Radiol. 2024 Feb;34(2):1388-1398. doi: 10.1007/s00330-023-10086-4. Epub 2023 Aug 17.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. There is no plan to make individual participant data available to individuals outside the research team
Related trials for Breast Cancer
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.
Michael J Michell, FRCR principal investigator
King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing digital breast tomosynthesis and standard two dimension digital mammogram in people with Breast Cancer, run by King's College Hospital NHS Trust at 1 site in United Kingdom.
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 1 inclusion and 2 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Nov 2019. 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 Kingdom. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Michael J Michell, FRCR (0203 299 3875, michael.michell@nhs.net), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
To compare the cost effectiveness of breast cancer screening with digital breast tomosynthesis and 2DDM vs standard screening with 2DDM (time frame: outcome measures to be reported from 2-7 years following beginning of recruitment into the trial). 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 NCT03733106, which also lists 2 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 6 Nov 2019.