SmokingNCT04179617
Impact of New Product Standards for JUUL Among Dual JUUL/Combusted Cigarette Users
A study testing 5% nicotine content JUUL pod and 3% nicotine content JUUL pod in people with Smoking and E-cigarette Use, run by Duke University.
Trial summary
To date the majority of experimental tobacco regulatory science has focused specifically on the impact of possible tobacco product standards (e.g. limiting e-cigarette flavor) on the use of the single tobacco product targeted by the standard (e.g. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 21 to 29 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Smoking, E-cigarette Use, Cigarette Smoking
- What is being tested?
- 5% nicotine content JUUL pod and 3% nicotine content JUUL pod
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 0 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Oct 2021to Dec 2021
- 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 21 to 29 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult
Who may be able to join
- Between the ages of 21-29 inclusive;
- Combusted cigarette smoker for ≥3 months AND smoke combusted cigarettes ≥1 day/past week;
- Owner and user of JUUL brand e-cigarette for ≥3 months AND use JUUL ≥1 day/ past week;
- Current or previous use of JUUL branded pods;
- Breath alcohol level=0.000;
- Provided contact information for 2 individuals who can corroborate JUUL EC and CC use
- Willing to abstain from EC and CC use for 24 hours prior to Experimental Visits
Who cannot join
- Reporting that 3% nicotine content JUUL pods are their preferred nicotine content;
- Reporting that nicotine-free pods are their preferred pod;
- Vaping THC or CBD concentrates (e.g., oils, waxes, shatters, crumbles) in the past 3 months;
- Pregnant, trying to become pregnant, breastfeeding;
- Plans to quit using e-cigarettes or regular cigarettes in the next 30 days;
- Current use of smoking cessation aids or participation in smoking cessation treatment;
Show all 11Show fewer
- Allergies to propylene glycol or glycerin;
- Lung or breathing problems (e.g., asthma, COPD, bronchitis) within the past 3 months;
- Systolic blood pressure ≥160 mmHg;
- Diastolic blood pressure ≥100 mmHg;
- Heart rate ≥115 bpm
About this study
To date the majority of experimental tobacco regulatory science has focused specifically on the impact of possible tobacco product standards (e.g. limiting e-cigarette flavor) on the use of the single tobacco product targeted by the standard (e.g. e-cigarettes) among individuals who primarily or solely use the targeted product (e.g. vapers). Whereas this "single target" approach has yielded a large amount of actionable evidence, it has also resulted in a significant gap in the regulatory science evidence base for two reasons: First, the focus on single tobacco product users has resulted in very little evidence regarding the impact of possible new product standards among multiple tobacco product (MTP) users. MTP users make up a sizeable proportion (30-40%) of the tobacco using population and individuals who use e-cigarettes (EC) and combusted cigarettes (CC) comprise the largest MTP using group (40% of MTP users). A lack of data on this population means that estimates of the impact of new product standards on public health are incomplete.
Despite some data derived from hypothetical tasks, little experimental research exists to evaluate how potential tobacco regulations might impact the use of other tobacco products in addition to the targeted product. It is critical to anticipate how potential restrictions on the EC market may impact EC and other tobacco product-such as CC-use.
In the proposed research, we will recruit young adult (age 21-29) dual EC/CC users evaluate the demand for participants' usual brand CC as compared to EC that vary in nicotine content (e.g., 5% vs. 3% pods). Participants will engage in a validated concurrent choice task in which they will work for fixed doses of EC vapor or CC smoke in exchange for expended effort. In addition, we will seek to answer this question in samples of dual EC and CC users-individuals who, because they regularly use both EC and CC, are most vulnerable to changes in the appeal of EC and CC brought about by a product standard limiting EC flavors.
Read the detailed description
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can enact tobacco product standards. Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA), the FDA Secretary has the authority to "adopt tobacco product standards… if the Secretary finds that a tobacco product standard is appropriate for the protection of the public health" based on evidence of the "risks and benefits to the population as a whole…". To date, substantial tobacco regulatory science (TRS) research has been conducted to inform new standards, including research on the impact of the nicotine content in CC and e-cigarettes (EC) products.
Significant gaps exist in the extant TRS knowledge base. Despite the large amount of actionable evidence generated to date, most TRS has taken a "single target" approach. Research has focused on the impact of possible tobacco product standards (e.g., nicotine reduction in CC) on the use of the single tobacco product targeted by the standard (i.e., CC) among individuals who primarily or solely use the targeted product (i.e., CC smokers). This approach has resulted in significant gaps in the TRS evidence base in two important ways: First, the focus on single tobacco product users has resulted in little evidence regarding the impact of new product standards on multiple tobacco product (MTP) users. MTP constitute 30-40% of the tobacco using population; dual EC and CC users comprise 44% of MTP users (Preliminary Studies). As such, dual EC/CC users represent a substantial minority of tobacco product users. A lack of data on this population means that estimates of the potential impact of new product standards on public health are incomplete.
Second, regulations targeting one product will likely impact other tobacco products, as well. In our recent work, we present evidence that any two tobacco products vary in the degree to which they substitute for one another and hypothesize that new standards targeting one product may have "off-target" effects impacting the appeal and use of other products. This is the central premise of this research. We hypothesize that the degree of substitution between two products varies, at least in part, as a function largely of product characteristics (e.g. flavor, nicotine strength). For instance, prior research (and Preliminary Studies) indicate that the availability of flavored e-liquid may determine the degree to which EC serve as a substitute for CC among both current and former CC users, suggesting that a limit on e-liquid flavors would reduce EC substitutability for CC.
Finally, the size of the dual EC/CC using population and degree of substitutability between EC and CC products have important implications for determining the population health impact of new standards for tobacco products. There is general agreement that EC and CC exist along a continuum of risk with combusted products (including CC) exposing the user to greater amounts of toxicants relative to non-combusted products (including EC). Thus, it is possible that two individuals, both of them dual EC/CC users, have similar levels of nicotine dependence and nicotine exposure, but very different toxicant exposure due to differences in the relative amounts of EC and CC used. Putatively then, new product standards that alter the appeal and use of either EC or CC can similarly increase or decrease toxicant exposure by changing the amount of each product used.
We propose that changes in one product (e.g., EC) can result in changes in the appeal and use of another product (e.g., CC), thus altering the degree to which one substitutes for another-a research question that has received comparatively little attention, but is critical for informing FDA regulation. We will systematically and experimentally evaluate the: a) the smoking and vaping topography and appeal of participants' usual brand (UB) CC and JUUL EC that vary in nicotine content (Aim 1); b) effects of limiting EC nicotine content on preferences for users' usual brand of CC (Aim 2); and c) potential moderators of product preferences (Aim 3).
JUUL brand EC are of particular interest for a number of reasons. JUUL-a pod-based EC-entered the U.S. market in 2015, and has skyrocketed in popularity. As of 2018, JUUL had 72% of the U.S. EC market share-a 453% increase over 2016. JUUL provides similar nicotine delivery to CC and can be used discreetly. Finally, these low wattage systems are typically used with e-liquids containing nicotine salts, which allow for e-liquid with higher nicotine concentrations to be consumed with less harshness than freebase nicotine. The increasing popularity of JUUL EC, along with their potential for significant nicotine delivery, highlights the need for research concerning this product. We also propose to conduct this research among a sample of dual JUUL EC and CC users-individuals who, because they regularly use both JUUL EC and CC, are most vulnerable to changes in the appeal of JUUL EC and CC brought about by a product standard limiting EC nicotine content.
- Conditions
- Smoking, E-cigarette Use, Cigarette Smoking
- Being tested
- 5% nicotine content JUUL pod, 3% nicotine content JUUL pod
- Keywords
- JUUL, dual use, multiple tobacco product use, nicotine content, tobacco regulatory science
- Medical subject headings
- Smoking, Vaping, Cigarette Smoking
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
5% nicotine content JUUL podOther
JUUL pods that contain 5% nicotine
3% nicotine content JUUL podOther
JUUL pods that contain 3% nicotine
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Preferred nicotine content JUUL pod | Experimental | During one experimental visit, participants will have access to a JUUL loaded with a 5% nicotine content pod (their preferred pod) Receives: Other: 5% nicotine content JUUL pod |
| Low nicotine content JUUL pod | Experimental | During one experimental visit, participants will have access to a JUUL loaded with a 3% nicotine content pod (non-preferred pod) Receives: Other: 3% nicotine content JUUL pod |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Participant rating of how much they liked the product
Participants are asked the question: "How much do you like the product?" and asked to rate it on a scale from 0-100 (0 = not at all, 100 = extremely)
Measured: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Participant rating of whether or not they would use the product again
Participants are asked the question: "Would you use it again?" and asked to rate it on a scale from 0-100 (0 = not at all, 100 = definitely)
Measured: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Participant rating of how much they would pay for a day's worth of the product
Participants are asked the question: "How much would you pay for a day's worth?" and asked to rate it on a scale from $0-$100
Measured: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Mean puff volume taken when using JUUL
A topography device will measure the volume of the 4 puffs taken when using JUUL during the Appeal Phase of the study; an average of the volume of these 4 puffs will be calculated
Measured: Measurements taken over the course of a 5-minute window during the Appeal Phase
Mean puff volume taken when using combusted cigarettes
A topography device will measure the volume of the 4 puffs taken when using a combusted cigarette during the Appeal Phase of the study; an average of the volume of these 4 puffs will be calculated
Measured: Measurements taken over the course of a 5-minute window during the Appeal Phase
Number of ratios completed for JUUL
The number of ratios completed (during a Progressive Ratio Task) to earn a puff of JUUL will be calculated
Measured: The number of ratios completed will be calculated over a 1-hour period during the Reinforcement Phase
Number of ratios completed for combusted cigarettes
The number of ratios completed (during a Progressive Ratio Task) to earn a puff of a combusted cigarette will be calculated
Measured: The number of ratios completed will be calculated over a 1-hour period during the Reinforcement Phase
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Nov 2019
- Study startOct 2021 (estimated)
- Primary completionDec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completionDec 2021 (estimated)
Why it stopped: Enrollment was never initiated; COVID prevented participant enrollment
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Other trials for SmokingStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Duke UniversityThe 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
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Duke University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Michigan, Georgetown University
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Lauren Pacek, PhD, Principal investigator, Duke University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04179617
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- Pro00103010
- Status last verified
- Sep 2020
- First submitted
- 8 Nov 2019
- Last updated
- 25 Aug 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 25 Aug 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Impact of New Product Standards for JUUL Among Dual JUUL/Combusted Cigarette Users
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04179617
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Pro00103010
- Conditions
- Smoking, E-cigarette Use, Cigarette Smoking
- Keywords
- JUUL, dual use, multiple tobacco product use, nicotine content, tobacco regulatory science
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- WithdrawnReason stopped: Enrollment was never initiated; COVID prevented participant enrollment
- Enrolment
- 0 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Duke UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Michigan, Georgetown University
- Study start
- Oct 2021 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Dec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Dec 2021 (estimated)
- First posted
- 27 Nov 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.
To date the majority of experimental tobacco regulatory science has focused specifically on the impact of possible tobacco product standards (e.g. limiting e-cigarette flavor) on the use of the single tobacco product targeted by the standard (e.g. e-cigarettes) among individuals who primarily or solely use the targeted product (e.g. vapers). Whereas this "single target" approach has yielded a large amount of actionable evidence, it has also resulted in a significant gap in the regulatory science evidence base for two reasons: First, the focus on single tobacco product users has resulted in very little evidence regarding the impact of possible new product standards among multiple tobacco product (MTP) users. MTP users make up a sizeable proportion (30-40%) of the tobacco using population and individuals who use e-cigarettes (EC) and combusted cigarettes (CC) comprise the largest MTP using group (40% of MTP users). A lack of data on this population means that estimates of the impact of new product standards on public health are incomplete.
Despite some data derived from hypothetical tasks, little experimental research exists to evaluate how potential tobacco regulations might impact the use of other tobacco products in addition to the targeted product. It is critical to anticipate how potential restrictions on the EC market may impact EC and other tobacco product-such as CC-use.
In the proposed research, we will recruit young adult (age 21-29) dual EC/CC users evaluate the demand for participants' usual brand CC as compared to EC that vary in nicotine content (e.g., 5% vs. 3% pods). Participants will engage in a validated concurrent choice task in which they will work for fixed doses of EC vapor or CC smoke in exchange for expended effort. In addition, we will seek to answer this question in samples of dual EC and CC users-individuals who, because they regularly use both EC and CC, are most vulnerable to changes in the appeal of EC and CC brought about by a product standard limiting EC flavors.
Detailed description
The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) can enact tobacco product standards. Under the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA), the FDA Secretary has the authority to "adopt tobacco product standards… if the Secretary finds that a tobacco product standard is appropriate for the protection of the public health" based on evidence of the "risks and benefits to the population as a whole…". To date, substantial tobacco regulatory science (TRS) research has been conducted to inform new standards, including research on the impact of the nicotine content in CC and e-cigarettes (EC) products.
Significant gaps exist in the extant TRS knowledge base. Despite the large amount of actionable evidence generated to date, most TRS has taken a "single target" approach. Research has focused on the impact of possible tobacco product standards (e.g., nicotine reduction in CC) on the use of the single tobacco product targeted by the standard (i.e., CC) among individuals who primarily or solely use the targeted product (i.e., CC smokers). This approach has resulted in significant gaps in the TRS evidence base in two important ways: First, the focus on single tobacco product users has resulted in little evidence regarding the impact of new product standards on multiple tobacco product (MTP) users. MTP constitute 30-40% of the tobacco using population; dual EC and CC users comprise 44% of MTP users (Preliminary Studies). As such, dual EC/CC users represent a substantial minority of tobacco product users. A lack of data on this population means that estimates of the potential impact of new product standards on public health are incomplete.
Second, regulations targeting one product will likely impact other tobacco products, as well. In our recent work, we present evidence that any two tobacco products vary in the degree to which they substitute for one another and hypothesize that new standards targeting one product may have "off-target" effects impacting the appeal and use of other products. This is the central premise of this research. We hypothesize that the degree of substitution between two products varies, at least in part, as a function largely of product characteristics (e.g. flavor, nicotine strength). For instance, prior research (and Preliminary Studies) indicate that the availability of flavored e-liquid may determine the degree to which EC serve as a substitute for CC among both current and former CC users, suggesting that a limit on e-liquid flavors would reduce EC substitutability for CC.
Finally, the size of the dual EC/CC using population and degree of substitutability between EC and CC products have important implications for determining the population health impact of new standards for tobacco products. There is general agreement that EC and CC exist along a continuum of risk with combusted products (including CC) exposing the user to greater amounts of toxicants relative to non-combusted products (including EC). Thus, it is possible that two individuals, both of them dual EC/CC users, have similar levels of nicotine dependence and nicotine exposure, but very different toxicant exposure due to differences in the relative amounts of EC and CC used. Putatively then, new product standards that alter the appeal and use of either EC or CC can similarly increase or decrease toxicant exposure by changing the amount of each product used.
We propose that changes in one product (e.g., EC) can result in changes in the appeal and use of another product (e.g., CC), thus altering the degree to which one substitutes for another-a research question that has received comparatively little attention, but is critical for informing FDA regulation. We will systematically and experimentally evaluate the: a) the smoking and vaping topography and appeal of participants' usual brand (UB) CC and JUUL EC that vary in nicotine content (Aim 1); b) effects of limiting EC nicotine content on preferences for users' usual brand of CC (Aim 2); and c) potential moderators of product preferences (Aim 3).
JUUL brand EC are of particular interest for a number of reasons. JUUL-a pod-based EC-entered the U.S. market in 2015, and has skyrocketed in popularity. As of 2018, JUUL had 72% of the U.S. EC market share-a 453% increase over 2016. JUUL provides similar nicotine delivery to CC and can be used discreetly. Finally, these low wattage systems are typically used with e-liquids containing nicotine salts, which allow for e-liquid with higher nicotine concentrations to be consumed with less harshness than freebase nicotine. The increasing popularity of JUUL EC, along with their potential for significant nicotine delivery, highlights the need for research concerning this product. We also propose to conduct this research among a sample of dual JUUL EC and CC users-individuals who, because they regularly use both JUUL EC and CC, are most vulnerable to changes in the appeal of JUUL EC and CC brought about by a product standard limiting EC nicotine content.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Other
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Crossover
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Preferred nicotine content JUUL pod | Experimental | Other: 5% nicotine content JUUL podDuring one experimental visit, participants will have access to a JUUL loaded with a 5% nicotine content pod (their preferred pod) |
| Low nicotine content JUUL pod | Experimental | Other: 3% nicotine content JUUL podDuring one experimental visit, participants will have access to a JUUL loaded with a 3% nicotine content pod (non-preferred pod) |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 21 to 29 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult
Key inclusion criteria (7 listed)
- Between the ages of 21-29 inclusive;
- Combusted cigarette smoker for ≥3 months AND smoke combusted cigarettes ≥1 day/past week;
- Owner and user of JUUL brand e-cigarette for ≥3 months AND use JUUL ≥1 day/ past week;
- Current or previous use of JUUL branded pods;
- Breath alcohol level=0.000;
Key exclusion criteria (11 listed)
- Reporting that 3% nicotine content JUUL pods are their preferred nicotine content;
- Reporting that nicotine-free pods are their preferred pod;
- Vaping THC or CBD concentrates (e.g., oils, waxes, shatters, crumbles) in the past 3 months;
- Pregnant, trying to become pregnant, breastfeeding;
- Plans to quit using e-cigarettes or regular cigarettes in the next 30 days;
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 |
|---|---|---|
| 5% nicotine content JUUL podJUUL pods that contain 5% nicotine | Other | Preferred nicotine content JUUL pod |
| 3% nicotine content JUUL podJUUL pods that contain 3% nicotine | Other | Low nicotine content JUUL pod |
Primary outcome
Participant rating of how much they liked the product
Time frame: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Participants are asked the question: "How much do you like the product?" and asked to rate it on a scale from 0-100 (0 = not at all, 100 = extremely)
Participant rating of whether or not they would use the product again
Time frame: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Participants are asked the question: "Would you use it again?" and asked to rate it on a scale from 0-100 (0 = not at all, 100 = definitely)
Participant rating of how much they would pay for a day's worth of the product
Time frame: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)
Participants are asked the question: "How much would you pay for a day's worth?" and asked to rate it on a scale from $0-$100
Mean puff volume taken when using JUUL
Time frame: Measurements taken over the course of a 5-minute window during the Appeal Phase
A topography device will measure the volume of the 4 puffs taken when using JUUL during the Appeal Phase of the study; an average of the volume of these 4 puffs will be calculated
Mean puff volume taken when using combusted cigarettes
Time frame: Measurements taken over the course of a 5-minute window during the Appeal Phase
A topography device will measure the volume of the 4 puffs taken when using a combusted cigarette during the Appeal Phase of the study; an average of the volume of these 4 puffs will be calculated
Number of ratios completed for JUUL
Time frame: The number of ratios completed will be calculated over a 1-hour period during the Reinforcement Phase
The number of ratios completed (during a Progressive Ratio Task) to earn a puff of JUUL will be calculated
Number of ratios completed for combusted cigarettes
Time frame: The number of ratios completed will be calculated over a 1-hour period during the Reinforcement Phase
The number of ratios completed (during a Progressive Ratio Task) to earn a puff of a combusted cigarette will be calculated
Results and safety
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 25 Aug 2021.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Smoking
Active, not recruiting
Symptoms and Functions in Patients With COPD and Chronic Bronchitis Switching From CIG to THS
COPD, Smoking
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Using Smartwatches to Monitor Smoking in Real-life Situations
Smoking
Not yet recruitingObservational study
PROMETHEE: A Shared Interregional Tele-Tobacco Cessation Platform Embedded Within the IMPULSION Lung Cancer Screening Program
Smoking Cessation, Lung Cancer Screening
Recruiting
Effectiveness of Volitional Help Sheets as an Adjunct to Treatment to Promote Behavior Change: A Pilot Study on Smoking
Tobacco Dependence
Not yet recruiting
Impacto 2.0: Mobile Smoking Cessation Across Texas
Cigarette Smoking, Smoking Cessation
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.
Lauren Pacek, PhD principal investigator
Duke University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing 5% nicotine content JUUL pod and 3% nicotine content JUUL pod in people with Smoking and E-cigarette Use, run by Duke University.
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 7 inclusion and 11 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: withdrawn, as of the sponsor's last update on 25 Aug 2021. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study was withdrawn before enrolling participants, so there are no results.
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?
Participant rating of how much they liked the product (time frame: Within 2 minutes of sampling product(s)). The study lists 7 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 Aug 2021.