Early Rectal CancerNCT04222530
The Diagnosis of Invasive Depth of Early Rectal Cancer
A study testing Linear EUS first and ME-NBI first in people with Early Rectal Cancer, run by Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University.
Trial summary
The purpose of this clinical study is to compare the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnified narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer, and to provide more powerful evidence for the choice of surgical methods for early rectal cancer. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Early Rectal Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Linear EUS first and ME-NBI first
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 81 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- 28 Jan 2020to 20 Dec 2022
- 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 18 to 80 years
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Colonoscopic diagnosis of early rectal cancer, the longest diameter >10mm.
- Age 18 Mel 80 years old;
- The subjects are willing to participate in this clinical trial and sign the relevant informed consent form.
Who cannot join
- The coagulation function of the subjects was abnormal and uncontrolled: international standardized ratio ((INR))>2 or platelet count <75000 platelets / μ L;
- Three months before entering the group, there were uncontrolled angina pectoris and / or myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, lung (respiratory failure), kidney, pancreas, liver disease or other diseases were judged by the researchers to be unable to participate in the study.
- Pregnant woman
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet.
About this study
Official title: A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study on the Accuracy of Linear Endoscopic Ultrasonography and Magnifying Narrowband Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Invasive Depth of Early Rectal Cancer
The purpose of this clinical study is to compare the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnified narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer, and to provide more powerful evidence for the choice of surgical methods for early rectal cancer. Patients with early rectal cancer who will be examined by endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the department of gastroenterology and general surgery will be examined by linear endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying narrowband endoscopy to examine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer, and the results are compared with the postoperative pathological results of the patients as the gold standard. It provides strong evidence that the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography in judging the invasive depth of early colorectal cancer is not inferior to that of magnifying narrowband endoscopy.
Read the detailed description
- Research purpose. 1.1 main purpose: to provide a more accurate preoperative evaluation method for the selection of surgical methods for early rectal cancer by comparing the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer. 1.2 Secondary purpose: to compare the sensitivity, specificity and examination time of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnified narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer.
- Experimental design. This study is a single-center randomized, self-controlled clinical trial. The subjects were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all subjects who met the inclusion criteria were required to sign an informed consent form before joining the group. The team of doctors is composed of four experienced endoscopes from the Department of Gastroenterology of Nanfang Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into group A (patients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy) and group B (patients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy first and then linear endoscopic ultrasonography). The examination results, examination time and complications were recorded in both groups. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained. The main observation indicators of this clinical study include the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of the invasive depth of early rectal cancer, in which the surgical and pathological results are the gold standard, and the examination time of the two methods are also compared.
- data analysis. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained. Patients who did not undergo surgery and patients whose surgical and pathological results were not consistent with rectal cancer were excluded. The remaining patients took the pathological results as the gold standard to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic narrowband imaging in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer, and the results were statistically analyzed by chi-square test.
- Safety monitoring, reporting and medical treatment. 4.1 adverse event (AE) definition. An adverse event refers to any adverse medical event that occurs after the patient or subject is examined in this study, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the examination. Therefore, adverse events can be any adverse physical signs (including abnormal laboratory results), symptoms, or diseases associated with the use of this study test, regardless of whether or not there is a causal relationship with the study test. Adverse events include serious adverse events ((Serious Adverse Event, SAE)) and non-serious adverse events.
4.2 SAE definition.
SAE refers to medical events during clinical trials, such as requiring hospitalization or prolonging hospitalization, disability, affecting working ability, endangering life or death, leading to congenital deformities and so on. Includes the following medical events:
- events leading to death;
- a life-threatening event (defined as the risk of the subject's immediate death at the time of the event);
- events requiring hospitalization or prolonging the duration of hospitalization;
- events that can lead to permanent or severe disability / insufficiency / affect work ability;
- congenital abnormality or birth defect; Other important medical events (defined as events that endanger the subject or require intervention to prevent the occurrence of any of the above).
4.3. Adverse event recording, collection, reporting and handling. 4.3.1 Collection, reporting and processing of AE. After signing the informed consent form and prior to the inspection of this study, all AE related to the operating procedures specified in the test scheme should be recorded in the CRF.
The records of the AE shall include the description of AE and all related symptoms, time of onset, severity, duration, relevance to the trial drug, action taken, and final outcome and outcome. AE records must use medical terms, and if the subjects' symptoms and signs can be summed up by a common cause, the diagnosis should be recorded as far as possible. Except for the indicators related to disease progression, all clinical events and laboratory adverse reactions with clinical significance can be dealt with with reference to the evaluation criteria for common adverse events ((CTCAE) version 5.0). Adverse reactions caused by the treatment will be recorded by the researchers.
4.3.2 Collection and reporting of SAE. From the time the subjects signed the informed consent form to the completion of the study, all SAE, regardless of the cause or relevance to the inspection of this study, need to be reported by using the SAE report form. In the event of SAE, researchers should immediately take appropriate treatment measures to ensure the safety of the subjects, and report to the applicant for drug registration, the State Drug Administration, the Provincial Food and Drug Administration, the ethics committee of the corresponding clinical trial center and the Medical Department of the Medical Administration and Hospital Administration within 24 hours, and promptly report to the ethics committee of the team leader. As far as possible, the first report should include the following: the source of the report, the items examined in this study, the name of serious adverse events, the time of occurrence, severity, duration, relevance to experimental drugs, measures taken and outcomes.
4.3.3 AE severity criteria.
The researchers will evaluate the severity of the disease based on the five-level criteria developed by the NCI CTCAE5.0 version:
Grade 1, mild; asymptomatic or mild signs; only clinical or diagnostic observation without medical intervention; Grade 2, moderate; age-related limited functions of daily life (such as cooking, shopping, phone calls, etc.); Grade 3, serious or medically important but not immediately life-threatening; leading to or prolonging the length of hospital stay; disability; activities of daily self-care are limited (activities of daily self-care: bathing, dressing, undressing, eating, going to the toilet, taking medicine, etc., but not bedridden); Level 4, life-threatening and in need of emergency treatment; Level 5, AE-related death. 4.3.4 other responsibilities of researchers during follow-up of serious adverse events.
Researchers should examine and treat serious adverse events according to clinical judgment, including necessary clinical laboratory examination, physical examination and so on. Any examination results or other updated SAE-related information must be followed up. The time limit and procedure of the follow-up report are the same as those of the initial report.
- Trial termination / suspension criteria. 5.1 the organizer has the right to terminate / suspend this study. Before terminating / suspending a clinical study, the sponsor must notify the researcher, the ethics committee and the relevant regulatory authorities and state the reasons. After the early termination / suspension of the study, the resumption of the study must be reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee.
5.2 termination / suspension requested by the Ethics Committee.
- The rule to end clinical trials.
The experiment ends when all the subjects meet the following conditions:
- include at least the number of valid cases.
- serious safety problems or serious adverse events occur.
- there are major mistakes in the test scheme.
- the organizer asks for termination.
- Data management. 7.1 data Management. The main contents are as follows: 1) researchers must ensure that the data are true, complete and accurate; 2) when making any corrections, the test records can only be underlined, side notes on the revised data, explain the reasons, signed and dated by the researchers, and shall not be scrubbed or overwritten the original records; 3) the items of laboratory inspection are complete. 7.2. Data recording and file saving. The data about the subjects on the case report form should be recorded in the way of the subject code, and the subjects can only be identified by the subject code or their initials.
This study uses EXCEL for data management: from the data entry to the verification requirements of the source data, to the query and answer of the quality control data, and finally to the operation of data locking and export. After confirming that there is no doubt about the data, the parties sign the database locking application form, and the database is locked by the data administrator. After the database is locked, the analysis database is exported by the data administrator and handed over to the statisticians for statistical analysis. The locked data can no longer be edited, and the problems found after the database is locked can be corrected in the statistical analysis program after confirmation.
- Statistic analysis. 8.1 sample size determination. After consulting the relevant literature, investigators found that the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of the depth of early rectal cancer invasion were about 90%, 75% and 90%, respectively. According to the previous research results of our team, the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of linear endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of early rectal cancer invasion were about 93%, 75% and 96%, respectively. Therefore, investigators speculate that the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer is not inferior to that of magnifying narrowband endoscopy, and the non-inferiority threshold is set at 10%. By setting the bilateral test level is 0.025, the test efficiency (power) is 80%, according to the 1:1 ratio, calculated by PASS16.0 software, each group needs Nylon 73, plus the shedding rate is 10%, each group has at least 81 cases, because this study is a self-control study, so a total of 81 patients with early rectal cancer are needed.
8.2 Statistical methods. The measurement data are described by mean and standard deviation, and the counting data are described by examples and percentage. Chi-square test was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the two methods. A P value less than or equal to 0.05 will be considered to have a statistically significant difference between the test group and the control group. SPSS20.0 statistical software was used to analyze the indexes of the two groups respectively.
8.3 Statistical software and general requirements: The observational indexes of the two groups were statistically analyzed by SPSS20.0 statistical software.
- Conditions
- Early Rectal Cancer
- Being tested
- Linear EUS first, ME-NBI first
- Keywords
- linear endoscopic ultrasonography, Magnifying narrowband endoscopy, Diagnostic accuracy
- Medical subject headings
- Rectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Linear EUS firstDiagnostic test
Linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrow band endoscopy are used to determine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer.
ME-NBI firstDiagnostic test
Magnifying narrow band endoscopy followed by linear endoscopic ultrasonography are used to determine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Linear EUS | Experimental | patients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy Receives: Diagnostic Test: Linear EUS first |
| ME-NBI | Experimental | patients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy followed by linear endoscopic ultrasonography Receives: Diagnostic Test: ME-NBI first |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Diagnostic accuracy
The pathological T staging of rectal cancer was selected as the gold standard. The preoperative T staging diagnosis of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy was compared with the final pathological diagnosis to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the two methods.
Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year
Secondary outcomes (1)
Operating time
The time from the beginning to the end of examining the invasion depth of early rectal cancer by linear endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying narrow band endoscopy
Measured: through study completion, an average of 1 year
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted10 Jan 2020
- Study start28 Jan 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completion20 Jun 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion20 Dec 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Early Rectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical 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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Model description
- This study is a single-center randomized, self-controlled clinical trial. The subjects were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all subjects who met the inclusion criteria were required to sign an informed consent form before joining the group. The team of doctors is composed of four experienced endoscopes from the Department of Gastroenterology of Nanfang Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into group A (patients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy) and group B (patients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy first and then linear endoscopic ultrasonography). The examination results, examination time and complications were recorded in both groups. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained.
- Masking
- Quadruple blind
- Who is masked
- Participant, Care provider, Investigator, Outcomes assessor
- Enrolment
- 81 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Side Liu, Doctor, Study director, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical UniversityYue Li, Doctor, Principal investigator, Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04222530
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- V2.0/2019-10-21(NFEC-2019-232)
- Status last verified
- Dec 2019
- First submitted
- 16 Dec 2019
- Last updated
- 10 Jan 2020
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: In order to protect privacy, investigators intend not to disclose the information of the participants.
Publications
Li L, He J, Hu H, Wang Y, Li W, Huang S, Rownoak J, Xu S, Xie F, Wang J, Mi W, Cai J, Ye Y, Liu S, Wang J, Li Y. Linear-Array Endoscopic Ultrasound and Narrow-Band Imaging Measure the Invasion Depth of Nonpedunculated Rectal Lesions With Comparable Accuracy Based on a Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2025 Mar 1;120(3):562-569. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002975. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
PubMed 39051647
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Jan 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Randomized Controlled Clinical Study on the Accuracy of Linear Endoscopic Ultrasonography and Magnifying Narrowband Endoscopy in the Diagnosis of Invasive Depth of Early Rectal Cancer
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04222530
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- V2.0/2019-10-21(NFEC-2019-232)
- Conditions
- Early Rectal Cancer
- Keywords
- linear endoscopic ultrasonography, Magnifying narrowband endoscopy, Diagnostic accuracy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 81 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 28 Jan 2020 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- 20 Jun 2022 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 20 Dec 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 10 Jan 2020 (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 purpose of this clinical study is to compare the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnified narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer, and to provide more powerful evidence for the choice of surgical methods for early rectal cancer. Patients with early rectal cancer who will be examined by endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the department of gastroenterology and general surgery will be examined by linear endoscopic ultrasonography or magnifying narrowband endoscopy to examine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer, and the results are compared with the postoperative pathological results of the patients as the gold standard. It provides strong evidence that the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography in judging the invasive depth of early colorectal cancer is not inferior to that of magnifying narrowband endoscopy.
Detailed description
- Research purpose. 1.1 main purpose: to provide a more accurate preoperative evaluation method for the selection of surgical methods for early rectal cancer by comparing the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer. 1.2 Secondary purpose: to compare the sensitivity, specificity and examination time of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnified narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer.
- Experimental design. This study is a single-center randomized, self-controlled clinical trial. The subjects were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all subjects who met the inclusion criteria were required to sign an informed consent form before joining the group. The team of doctors is composed of four experienced endoscopes from the Department of Gastroenterology of Nanfang Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into group A (patients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy) and group B (patients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy first and then linear endoscopic ultrasonography). The examination results, examination time and complications were recorded in both groups. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained. The main observation indicators of this clinical study include the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of the invasive depth of early rectal cancer, in which the surgical and pathological results are the gold standard, and the examination time of the two methods are also compared.
- data analysis. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained. Patients who did not undergo surgery and patients whose surgical and pathological results were not consistent with rectal cancer were excluded. The remaining patients took the pathological results as the gold standard to calculate the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and endoscopic narrowband imaging in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer, and the results were statistically analyzed by chi-square test.
- Safety monitoring, reporting and medical treatment. 4.1 adverse event (AE) definition. An adverse event refers to any adverse medical event that occurs after the patient or subject is examined in this study, which does not necessarily have a causal relationship with the examination. Therefore, adverse events can be any adverse physical signs (including abnormal laboratory results), symptoms, or diseases associated with the use of this study test, regardless of whether or not there is a causal relationship with the study test. Adverse events include serious adverse events ((Serious Adverse Event, SAE)) and non-serious adverse events.
4.2 SAE definition.
SAE refers to medical events during clinical trials, such as requiring hospitalization or prolonging hospitalization, disability, affecting working ability, endangering life or death, leading to congenital deformities and so on. Includes the following medical events:
- events leading to death;
- a life-threatening event (defined as the risk of the subject's immediate death at the time of the event);
- events requiring hospitalization or prolonging the duration of hospitalization;
- events that can lead to permanent or severe disability / insufficiency / affect work ability;
- congenital abnormality or birth defect; Other important medical events (defined as events that endanger the subject or require intervention to prevent the occurrence of any of the above).
4.3. Adverse event recording, collection, reporting and handling. 4.3.1 Collection, reporting and processing of AE. After signing the informed consent form and prior to the inspection of this study, all AE related to the operating procedures specified in the test scheme should be recorded in the CRF.
The records of the AE shall include the description of AE and all related symptoms, time of onset, severity, duration, relevance to the trial drug, action taken, and final outcome and outcome. AE records must use medical terms, and if the subjects' symptoms and signs can be summed up by a common cause, the diagnosis should be recorded as far as possible. Except for the indicators related to disease progression, all clinical events and laboratory adverse reactions with clinical significance can be dealt with with reference to the evaluation criteria for common adverse events ((CTCAE) version 5.0). Adverse reactions caused by the treatment will be recorded by the researchers.
4.3.2 Collection and reporting of SAE. From the time the subjects signed the informed consent form to the completion of the study, all SAE, regardless of the cause or relevance to the inspection of this study, need to be reported by using the SAE report form. In the event of SAE, researchers should immediately take appropriate treatment measures to ensure the safety of the subjects, and report to the applicant for drug registration, the State Drug Administration, the Provincial Food and Drug Administration, the ethics committee of the corresponding clinical trial center and the Medical Department of the Medical Administration and Hospital Administration within 24 hours, and promptly report to the ethics committee of the team leader. As far as possible, the first report should include the following: the source of the report, the items examined in this study, the name of serious adverse events, the time of occurrence, severity, duration, relevance to experimental drugs, measures taken and outcomes.
4.3.3 AE severity criteria.
The researchers will evaluate the severity of the disease based on the five-level criteria developed by the NCI CTCAE5.0 version:
Grade 1, mild; asymptomatic or mild signs; only clinical or diagnostic observation without medical intervention; Grade 2, moderate; age-related limited functions of daily life (such as cooking, shopping, phone calls, etc.); Grade 3, serious or medically important but not immediately life-threatening; leading to or prolonging the length of hospital stay; disability; activities of daily self-care are limited (activities of daily self-care: bathing, dressing, undressing, eating, going to the toilet, taking medicine, etc., but not bedridden); Level 4, life-threatening and in need of emergency treatment; Level 5, AE-related death. 4.3.4 other responsibilities of researchers during follow-up of serious adverse events.
Researchers should examine and treat serious adverse events according to clinical judgment, including necessary clinical laboratory examination, physical examination and so on. Any examination results or other updated SAE-related information must be followed up. The time limit and procedure of the follow-up report are the same as those of the initial report.
- Trial termination / suspension criteria. 5.1 the organizer has the right to terminate / suspend this study. Before terminating / suspending a clinical study, the sponsor must notify the researcher, the ethics committee and the relevant regulatory authorities and state the reasons. After the early termination / suspension of the study, the resumption of the study must be reviewed and approved by the Ethics Committee.
5.2 termination / suspension requested by the Ethics Committee.
- The rule to end clinical trials.
The experiment ends when all the subjects meet the following conditions:
- include at least the number of valid cases.
- serious safety problems or serious adverse events occur.
- there are major mistakes in the test scheme.
- the organizer asks for termination.
- Data management. 7.1 data Management. The main contents are as follows: 1) researchers must ensure that the data are true, complete and accurate; 2) when making any corrections, the test records can only be underlined, side notes on the revised data, explain the reasons, signed and dated by the researchers, and shall not be scrubbed or overwritten the original records; 3) the items of laboratory inspection are complete. 7.2. Data recording and file saving. The data about the subjects on the case report form should be recorded in the way of the subject code, and the subjects can only be identified by the subject code or their initials.
This study uses EXCEL for data management: from the data entry to the verification requirements of the source data, to the query and answer of the quality control data, and finally to the operation of data locking and export. After confirming that there is no doubt about the data, the parties sign the database locking application form, and the database is locked by the data administrator. After the database is locked, the analysis database is exported by the data administrator and handed over to the statisticians for statistical analysis. The locked data can no longer be edited, and the problems found after the database is locked can be corrected in the statistical analysis program after confirmation.
- Statistic analysis. 8.1 sample size determination. After consulting the relevant literature, investigators found that the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of magnifying narrowband endoscopy in the diagnosis of the depth of early rectal cancer invasion were about 90%, 75% and 90%, respectively. According to the previous research results of our team, the accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of linear endoscopic ultrasound in the diagnosis of early rectal cancer invasion were about 93%, 75% and 96%, respectively. Therefore, investigators speculate that the accuracy of linear endoscopic ultrasonography in the diagnosis of invasive depth of early rectal cancer is not inferior to that of magnifying narrowband endoscopy, and the non-inferiority threshold is set at 10%. By setting the bilateral test level is 0.025, the test efficiency (power) is 80%, according to the 1:1 ratio, calculated by PASS16.0 software, each group needs Nylon 73, plus the shedding rate is 10%, each group has at least 81 cases, because this study is a self-control study, so a total of 81 patients with early rectal cancer are needed.
8.2 Statistical methods. The measurement data are described by mean and standard deviation, and the counting data are described by examples and percentage. Chi-square test was used to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of the two methods. A P value less than or equal to 0.05 will be considered to have a statistically significant difference between the test group and the control group. SPSS20.0 statistical software was used to analyze the indexes of the two groups respectively.
8.3 Statistical software and general requirements: The observational indexes of the two groups were statistically analyzed by SPSS20.0 statistical software.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Quadruple blind (participant, care provider, investigator, outcomes assessor)
- Number of arms
- 2
- Model description
- This study is a single-center randomized, self-controlled clinical trial. The subjects were selected according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and all subjects who met the inclusion criteria were required to sign an informed consent form before joining the group. The team of doctors is composed of four experienced endoscopes from the Department of Gastroenterology of Nanfang Hospital. Patients were randomly divided into group A (patients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy) and group B (patients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy first and then linear endoscopic ultrasonography). The examination results, examination time and complications were recorded in both groups. After examination, continue to follow up the patient's operation until the patient's surgical and pathological results are obtained.
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Linear EUS | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: Linear EUS firstpatients underwent linear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrowband endoscopy |
| ME-NBI | Experimental | Diagnostic Test: ME-NBI firstpatients underwent magnifying narrowband endoscopy followed by linear endoscopic ultrasonography |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Colonoscopic diagnosis of early rectal cancer, the longest diameter >10mm.
- Age 18 Mel 80 years old;
- The subjects are willing to participate in this clinical trial and sign the relevant informed consent form.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- The coagulation function of the subjects was abnormal and uncontrolled: international standardized ratio ((INR))>2 or platelet count <75000 platelets / μ L;
- Three months before entering the group, there were uncontrolled angina pectoris and / or myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, lung (respiratory failure), kidney, pancreas, liver disease or other diseases were judged by the researchers to be unable to participate in the study.
- Pregnant woman
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Linear EUS firstLinear endoscopic ultrasonography followed by magnifying narrow band endoscopy are used to determine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer. | Diagnostic test | Linear EUS |
| ME-NBI firstMagnifying narrow band endoscopy followed by linear endoscopic ultrasonography are used to determine the depth of invasion of early rectal cancer. | Diagnostic test | ME-NBI |
Primary outcome
Diagnostic accuracy
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year
The pathological T staging of rectal cancer was selected as the gold standard. The preoperative T staging diagnosis of linear endoscopic ultrasonography and magnifying narrowband endoscopy was compared with the final pathological diagnosis to calculate the diagnostic accuracy of the two methods.
1 secondary outcome
Operating time
Time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 10 Jan 2020.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 39051647Li L, He J, Hu H, Wang Y, Li W, Huang S, Rownoak J, Xu S, Xie F, Wang J, Mi W, Cai J, Ye Y, Liu S, Wang J, Li Y. Linear-Array Endoscopic Ultrasound and Narrow-Band Imaging Measure the Invasion Depth of Nonpedunculated Rectal Lesions With Comparable Accuracy Based on a Randomized Controlled Trial. Am J Gastroenterol. 2025 Mar 1;120(3):562-569. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000002975. Epub 2024 Jul 25.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. In order to protect privacy, investigators intend not to disclose the information of the participants.
Related trials for Early Rectal Cancer
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
RecruitingObservational study
Outcomes of Knife-Assisted Full-Thickness Resection for Rectal Lesions: A Multicenter Study
Colorectal Cancer
RecruitingPhase 2
Study of Pembrolizumab, Carboplatin, Paclitaxel, and Radiation for the Treatment of Early-Stage Anal Cancer
Anal Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Collecting Blood Samples From Patients With and Without Cancer to Evaluate Tests for Early Cancer Detection
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia, Acute Myeloid Leukemia
RecruitingObservational study
cfDNA Assay Prospective Observational Validation for Early Cancer Detection and Minimal Residual Disease
Brain Cancer, Breast Cancer
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.
Side Liu, Doctor study director
Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
Yue Li, Doctor principal investigator
Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical University
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Linear EUS first and ME-NBI first in people with Early Rectal Cancer, run by Nanfang Hospital, Southern Medical 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 3 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: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 10 Jan 2020. 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?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Yue Li, Doctor (8615975537291, liyue_1989919@126.com), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Diagnostic accuracy (time frame: through study completion, an average of 1 year). 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 NCT04222530, 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 10 Jan 2020.