Prostate CancerNCT03936127
Comparison of a Novel Transperineal Targeted Fusion Biopsy System to Conventional Transrectal Targeted Fusion Biopsy
A study testing Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Dr. Nicola Schieda at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This study is designed as a randomized control trial which intends to determine if transperineal (TP) targeted biopsy is not inferior to transrectal (TR) targeted biopsy for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer while comparing post-procedural infection rates between the two techniques. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age, men only
- Conditions the study is for
- Prostate Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 360 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- 11 Oct 2022to Dec 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 Any age
- Men only
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- MRI positive - abnormal area detected
- Patient re-evaluated in the TOH Prostate CAC (Cancer Assessment Centre) for planning of targeted biopsy
- Signed Consent
Who cannot join
- MRI negative - no abnormal area detected
- Patient with a prior diagnosis of prostate cancer enrolled in active surveillance
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
The Ottawa Hospital
Ottawa, Ontario
Nicola Schieda, MD, 613-759-0958, nschieda@toh.ca
Betty Anne Schwarz, PhD, 613-798-5555 ext. 17522, baschwarz@toh.ca
About this study
Official title: Comparison of a Novel Transperineal Targeted Fusion Biopsy System to Conventional Transrectal Targeted Fusion Biopsy for Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancers and to Eliminate Post-procedure Related Infections: A Randomized Control Trial
This study is designed as a randomized control trial which intends to determine if transperineal (TP) targeted biopsy is not inferior to transrectal (TR) targeted biopsy for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer while comparing post-procedural infection rates between the two techniques. The study will also look to compare patient reported pain scores related to the procedure, rates of other minor complications (e.g. bleeding, urinary retention) and procedure time.
The expected sample size at The Ottawa Hospital is 360 men.
Read the detailed description
Patients undergo mp-MRI, at the discretion of the treating Urologist, when they are referred to the Cancer Assessment Clinic for their initial visit with a risk factor for prostate cancer (e.g. abnormal digital rectal exam [DRE] or elevated prostate serum antigen [PSA] level). Performing an mp-MRI in a man with risk factors for prostate cancer prior to an initial biopsy has become the standard of care for diagnosis of prostate cancer based on two large multi-center randomized control trials.
At the second visit, which is standard of care, the Urologist (or delegate [Resident, Fellow]) will discuss targeted biopsy and will introduce the trial design obtaining informed consent to participate. If consent is obtained, the patient will be randomly assigned to receive either the standard transrectal (TR) ultrasound guided targeted fusion biopsy or the novel transperineal (TP) targeted fusion biopsy system which has also been preliminarily validated as being accurate for detection of significant prostate cancers at targeted biopsy.
Patients will be notified regarding which method of targeted biopsy will be employed at time of scheduling.
Both the TR and TP biopsies will be conducted in existing biopsy rooms in The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) and will employ a brief 30-minute post-procedural observation period at which point the patient is required to urinate prior to discharge. Level of pain will be recorded by the ultrasound technologists during the 30 minutes observation period as well.
This study aims to compare ultrasound guided transrectal and transperineal targeted fusion biopsy for diagnosis of prostate cancer in abnormalities detected on MRI for the purpose of reducing or completely eliminating the risk of serious infection associated with the transrectal approach.
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Being tested
- Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy
- Keywords
- Transperineal, Transrectal, Fusion Biopsy
- Medical subject headings
- Prostatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion BiopsyProcedure or surgery
Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Transperineal (TP) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy | Experimental | Transperineal (TP) ultrasound (US) targeted fusion biopsy (which is performed using a validated Health Canada approved elastic software fusion platform). Receives: Procedure: Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy |
| Transrectal (TR) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsies | Active comparator | Transrectal (TR) ultrasound (US) targeted fusion biopsy (which is performed using a validated Health Canada approved elastic software fusion platform). Receives: Procedure: Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Infection Rate
Number of patients with or without post-procedural infection.
Measured: Patients who have undergone biopsy of the prostate will be seen by their Urologist in routine clinical follow-up, typically in 4-6 weeks, as per standard of care.
Secondary outcomes (1)
Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
Gleason score of tumor in biopsy samples containing cancer.
Measured: Patients who have undergone biopsy of the prostate will be seen by their Urologist in routine clinical follow-up, typically in 4-6 weeks, as per standard of care.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 May 2019
- Study start11 Oct 2022
- Primary completionDec 2024 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2024 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (13)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Prostate CancerStudies 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
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 360 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Dr. Nicola Schieda
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Association
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Dr. Nicola Schieda, The Ottawa Hospital
- Investigators
- Nicola Schieda, MD, Principal investigator, The Ottawa Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03936127
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 20190262-01H
- Status last verified
- Oct 2022
- First submitted
- 25 Apr 2019
- Last updated
- 25 Oct 2022
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Yes: De-identified individual participant data for all primary and secondary outcome measures will be made available.
Publications
Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M; PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. Epub 2017 Jan 20.
PubMed 28110982Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budaus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM; PRECISION Study Group Collaborators. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. Epub 2018 Mar 18.
PubMed 29552975Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH, Loblaw DA, Trachtenberg J, Stanimirovic A, Simor AE, Seth A, Urbach DR, Narod SA. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013 Jan;189(1 Suppl):S12-7; discussion S17-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.015.
PubMed 23234616Rudzinski JK, Kawakami J. Incidence of infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in Calgary, Alberta, Canada: A retrospective population-based analysis. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014 May;8(5-6):E301-5. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.1751.
PubMed 24940454Guo LH, Wu R, Xu HX, Xu JM, Wu J, Wang S, Bo XW, Liu BJ. Comparison between Ultrasound Guided Transperineal and Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Trial. Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 3;5:16089. doi: 10.1038/srep16089.
PubMed 26526558Verma S, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Oto A, Tempany CM, Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB. The Current State of MR Imaging-targeted Biopsy Techniques for Detection of Prostate Cancer. Radiology. 2017 Nov;285(2):343-356. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161684.
PubMed 29045233Barrett T, Haider MA. The Emerging Role of MRI in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance and Ongoing Challenges. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan;208(1):131-139. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16355. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
PubMed 27726415Kosarek CD, Mahmoud AM, Eyzaguirre EJ, Shan Y, Walser EM, Horn GL, Williams SB. Initial series of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-fusion targeted prostate biopsy using the first transperineal targeted platform available in the USA. BJU Int. 2018 Nov;122(5):909-912. doi: 10.1111/bju.14206. Epub 2018 Apr 14.
PubMed 29569311Costa DN, Kay FU, Pedrosa I, Kolski L, Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG, Hornberger B, Xi Y, Francis F, Rofsky NM. An initial negative round of targeted biopsies in men with highly suspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance findings does not exclude clinically significant prostate cancer-Preliminary experience. Urol Oncol. 2017 Apr;35(4):149.e15-149.e21. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.11.006. Epub 2016 Dec 9.
PubMed 27939349Oderda M, Faletti R, Battisti G, Dalmasso E, Falcone M, Marra G, Palazzetti A, Zitella A, Bergamasco L, Gandini G, Gontero P. Prostate Cancer Detection Rate with Koelis Fusion Biopsies versus Cognitive Biopsies: A Comparative Study. Urol Int. 2016;97(2):230-7. doi: 10.1159/000445524. Epub 2016 Jun 4.
PubMed 27256369Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, Margolis D, Schnall MD, Shtern F, Tempany CM, Thoeny HC, Verma S. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):16-40. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052. Epub 2015 Oct 1.
PubMed 26427566Breivik H, Borchgrevink PC, Allen SM, Rosseland LA, Romundstad L, Hals EK, Kvarstein G, Stubhaug A. Assessment of pain. Br J Anaesth. 2008 Jul;101(1):17-24. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen103. Epub 2008 May 16.
PubMed 18487245Schmit GD, Schenck LA, Thompson RH, Boorjian SA, Kurup AN, Weisbrod AJ, Kor DJ, Callstrom MR, Atwell TD, Carter RE. Predicting renal cryoablation complications: new risk score based on tumor size and location and patient history. Radiology. 2014 Sep;272(3):903-10. doi: 10.1148/radiol.14132548. Epub 2014 May 7.
PubMed 24814178
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Oct 2022. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Comparison of a Novel Transperineal Targeted Fusion Biopsy System to Conventional Transrectal Targeted Fusion Biopsy for Diagnosis of Clinically Significant Prostate Cancers and to Eliminate Post-procedure Related Infections: A Randomized Control Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT03936127
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 20190262-01H
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer
- Keywords
- Transperineal, Transrectal, Fusion Biopsy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 360 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Dr. Nicola SchiedaUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- The Ottawa Hospital Academic Medical Association
- Study start
- 11 Oct 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2024 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2024 (estimated)
- First posted
- 3 May 2019 (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.
This study is designed as a randomized control trial which intends to determine if transperineal (TP) targeted biopsy is not inferior to transrectal (TR) targeted biopsy for diagnosis of clinically significant prostate cancer while comparing post-procedural infection rates between the two techniques. The study will also look to compare patient reported pain scores related to the procedure, rates of other minor complications (e.g. bleeding, urinary retention) and procedure time.
The expected sample size at The Ottawa Hospital is 360 men.
Detailed description
Patients undergo mp-MRI, at the discretion of the treating Urologist, when they are referred to the Cancer Assessment Clinic for their initial visit with a risk factor for prostate cancer (e.g. abnormal digital rectal exam [DRE] or elevated prostate serum antigen [PSA] level). Performing an mp-MRI in a man with risk factors for prostate cancer prior to an initial biopsy has become the standard of care for diagnosis of prostate cancer based on two large multi-center randomized control trials.
At the second visit, which is standard of care, the Urologist (or delegate [Resident, Fellow]) will discuss targeted biopsy and will introduce the trial design obtaining informed consent to participate. If consent is obtained, the patient will be randomly assigned to receive either the standard transrectal (TR) ultrasound guided targeted fusion biopsy or the novel transperineal (TP) targeted fusion biopsy system which has also been preliminarily validated as being accurate for detection of significant prostate cancers at targeted biopsy.
Patients will be notified regarding which method of targeted biopsy will be employed at time of scheduling.
Both the TR and TP biopsies will be conducted in existing biopsy rooms in The Ottawa Hospital (TOH) and will employ a brief 30-minute post-procedural observation period at which point the patient is required to urinate prior to discharge. Level of pain will be recorded by the ultrasound technologists during the 30 minutes observation period as well.
This study aims to compare ultrasound guided transrectal and transperineal targeted fusion biopsy for diagnosis of prostate cancer in abnormalities detected on MRI for the purpose of reducing or completely eliminating the risk of serious infection associated with the transrectal approach.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Transperineal (TP) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy | Experimental | Procedure: Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion BiopsyTransperineal (TP) ultrasound (US) targeted fusion biopsy (which is performed using a validated Health Canada approved elastic software fusion platform). |
| Transrectal (TR) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsies | Active comparator | Procedure: Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion BiopsyTransrectal (TR) ultrasound (US) targeted fusion biopsy (which is performed using a validated Health Canada approved elastic software fusion platform). |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- MRI positive - abnormal area detected
- Patient re-evaluated in the TOH Prostate CAC (Cancer Assessment Centre) for planning of targeted biopsy
- Signed Consent
Key exclusion criteria (2 listed)
- MRI negative - no abnormal area detected
- Patient with a prior diagnosis of prostate cancer enrolled in active surveillance
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion BiopsyUltrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy | Procedure or surgery | Transperineal (TP) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy, Transrectal (TR) Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsies |
Primary outcome
Infection Rate
Time frame: Patients who have undergone biopsy of the prostate will be seen by their Urologist in routine clinical follow-up, typically in 4-6 weeks, as per standard of care.
Number of patients with or without post-procedural infection.
1 secondary outcome
Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer
Time frame: Patients who have undergone biopsy of the prostate will be seen by their Urologist in routine clinical follow-up, typically in 4-6 weeks, as per standard of care.
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Oct 2022.
- Background: PubMed 28110982Ahmed HU, El-Shater Bosaily A, Brown LC, Gabe R, Kaplan R, Parmar MK, Collaco-Moraes Y, Ward K, Hindley RG, Freeman A, Kirkham AP, Oldroyd R, Parker C, Emberton M; PROMIS study group. Diagnostic accuracy of multi-parametric MRI and TRUS biopsy in prostate cancer (PROMIS): a paired validating confirmatory study. Lancet. 2017 Feb 25;389(10071):815-822. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)32401-1. Epub 2017 Jan 20.
- Background: PubMed 29552975Kasivisvanathan V, Rannikko AS, Borghi M, Panebianco V, Mynderse LA, Vaarala MH, Briganti A, Budaus L, Hellawell G, Hindley RG, Roobol MJ, Eggener S, Ghei M, Villers A, Bladou F, Villeirs GM, Virdi J, Boxler S, Robert G, Singh PB, Venderink W, Hadaschik BA, Ruffion A, Hu JC, Margolis D, Crouzet S, Klotz L, Taneja SS, Pinto P, Gill I, Allen C, Giganti F, Freeman A, Morris S, Punwani S, Williams NR, Brew-Graves C, Deeks J, Takwoingi Y, Emberton M, Moore CM; PRECISION Study Group Collaborators. MRI-Targeted or Standard Biopsy for Prostate-Cancer Diagnosis. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 10;378(19):1767-1777. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1801993. Epub 2018 Mar 18.
- Background: PubMed 23234616Nam RK, Saskin R, Lee Y, Liu Y, Law C, Klotz LH, Loblaw DA, Trachtenberg J, Stanimirovic A, Simor AE, Seth A, Urbach DR, Narod SA. Increasing hospital admission rates for urological complications after transrectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsy. J Urol. 2013 Jan;189(1 Suppl):S12-7; discussion S17-8. doi: 10.1016/j.juro.2012.11.015.
- Background: PubMed 24940454Rudzinski JK, Kawakami J. Incidence of infectious complications following transrectal ultrasound-guided prostate biopsy in Calgary, Alberta, Canada: A retrospective population-based analysis. Can Urol Assoc J. 2014 May;8(5-6):E301-5. doi: 10.5489/cuaj.1751.
- Background: PubMed 26526558Guo LH, Wu R, Xu HX, Xu JM, Wu J, Wang S, Bo XW, Liu BJ. Comparison between Ultrasound Guided Transperineal and Transrectal Prostate Biopsy: A Prospective, Randomized, and Controlled Trial. Sci Rep. 2015 Nov 3;5:16089. doi: 10.1038/srep16089.
- Background: PubMed 29045233Verma S, Choyke PL, Eberhardt SC, Oto A, Tempany CM, Turkbey B, Rosenkrantz AB. The Current State of MR Imaging-targeted Biopsy Techniques for Detection of Prostate Cancer. Radiology. 2017 Nov;285(2):343-356. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2017161684.
- Background: PubMed 27726415Barrett T, Haider MA. The Emerging Role of MRI in Prostate Cancer Active Surveillance and Ongoing Challenges. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2017 Jan;208(1):131-139. doi: 10.2214/AJR.16.16355. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
- Background: PubMed 29569311Kosarek CD, Mahmoud AM, Eyzaguirre EJ, Shan Y, Walser EM, Horn GL, Williams SB. Initial series of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-fusion targeted prostate biopsy using the first transperineal targeted platform available in the USA. BJU Int. 2018 Nov;122(5):909-912. doi: 10.1111/bju.14206. Epub 2018 Apr 14.
- Background: PubMed 27939349Costa DN, Kay FU, Pedrosa I, Kolski L, Lotan Y, Roehrborn CG, Hornberger B, Xi Y, Francis F, Rofsky NM. An initial negative round of targeted biopsies in men with highly suspicious multiparametric magnetic resonance findings does not exclude clinically significant prostate cancer-Preliminary experience. Urol Oncol. 2017 Apr;35(4):149.e15-149.e21. doi: 10.1016/j.urolonc.2016.11.006. Epub 2016 Dec 9.
- Background: PubMed 27256369Oderda M, Faletti R, Battisti G, Dalmasso E, Falcone M, Marra G, Palazzetti A, Zitella A, Bergamasco L, Gandini G, Gontero P. Prostate Cancer Detection Rate with Koelis Fusion Biopsies versus Cognitive Biopsies: A Comparative Study. Urol Int. 2016;97(2):230-7. doi: 10.1159/000445524. Epub 2016 Jun 4.
- Background: PubMed 26427566Weinreb JC, Barentsz JO, Choyke PL, Cornud F, Haider MA, Macura KJ, Margolis D, Schnall MD, Shtern F, Tempany CM, Thoeny HC, Verma S. PI-RADS Prostate Imaging - Reporting and Data System: 2015, Version 2. Eur Urol. 2016 Jan;69(1):16-40. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.08.052. Epub 2015 Oct 1.
- Background: PubMed 18487245Breivik H, Borchgrevink PC, Allen SM, Rosseland LA, Romundstad L, Hals EK, Kvarstein G, Stubhaug A. Assessment of pain. Br J Anaesth. 2008 Jul;101(1):17-24. doi: 10.1093/bja/aen103. Epub 2008 May 16.
- Canadian Cancer Society (2018) Canadian Cancer StatisticsLink provided by the sponsor.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Yes. De-identified individual participant data for all primary and secondary outcome measures will be made available.
Related trials for Prostate Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Active, not recruitingObservational study
MRI Fusion Biopsy vs. Micro-Ultrasound Guided Biopsy
Prostate Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
Not yet recruitingPhase 1/2
STAR0602 With Nivolumab in Non Small Cell Lung Cancer and in Metastatic Castrate-Resistant Prostate Cancer, and STAR0602 Alone in Thymic Carcinoma
NSCLC, Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Recruiting
Rehabilitation and Sex Therapy to Optimize Recovery After Prostate Cancer Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Urinary Incontinence
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.
Nicola Schieda, MD principal investigator
The Ottawa Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Ultrasound (US) Targeted Fusion Biopsy in people with Prostate Cancer, run by Dr. Nicola Schieda at 1 site in Canada.
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 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 25 Oct 2022. 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 Canada. 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 Nicola Schieda, MD (613-759-0958, nschieda@toh.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Infection Rate (time frame: Patients who have undergone biopsy of the prostate will be seen by their Urologist in routine clinical follow-up, typically in 4-6 weeks, as per standard of care.). 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 NCT03936127, which also lists 13 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 Oct 2022.