Heart FailurePhase 4NCT04334447
Implementing Standards of Care for Heart Failure Patients in General Practice - A Regional Disease Management Program
A Phase 4 study testing Improved primary care HF diagnostics, Heart Failure education and Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge care in people with Heart Failure, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
Trial summary
Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem. Most chronic HF management occurs in primary care. Although guidelines exist, there is an important implementation gap in current HF care in Belgium. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Heart Failure
- What is being tested?
- Improved primary care HF diagnostics, Heart Failure education and Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge care
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 200 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBelgium
- Study dates
- 4 Nov 2019to 31 Jul 2022
- Phase
- Phase 4
- 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 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosis of HF
Who cannot join
- No pre-specified exclusion criteria
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Belgium1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Academisch Centrum Huisartsgeneeskunde
Leuven, Vlaams-Brabant, 3000
Willem Raat, 016 37 66 21, willem.raat@kuleuven.be
About this study
Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem. Most chronic HF management occurs in primary care. Although guidelines exist, there is an important implementation gap in current HF care in Belgium. We will conduct a non-randomized, non-controlled prospective observational trial to implement guideline-recommended best clinical practices in primary care in Leuven, a region of ± 100.000 inhabitants. These best clinical practices include education of general practitioners, access to natriuretic peptides and audits in the electronic health record (EHR), training and implementation of HF educators in primary care and a structured post-discharge transition process . The main objective is to implement best clinical practices in a dynamic way and study the implementation process. We will evaluate the implementation of several guideline-recommended best clinical practices to optimize the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure in a real-world primary care setting.
Read the detailed description
The primary objective of this study is to establish a dynamic implementation environment for HF management in Leuven. It is not a primary objective to study the effect of various best clinical practices on the defined outcomes. We focus on the evolution in quality of HF management through an evaluation of the implementation process. Specific research questions are as follows:
- Do HF education and a learning environment improve the GPs' self-efficacy?
- Does reimbursement of the NT-proBNP test lead to implementation?
- How do primary care professionals and patients experience the introduction of a primary care HF educator?
- What is the adoption rate of a HF discharge checklist in hospitals' EHR? How do care professionals adhere to a checklist-supported structured discharge protocol?
- What is the feasibility of implementing automated audits in GPs EHR?
- Does this implementation study affect regional levels of HF hospitalization and readmissions?
Outcomes
Measurements at baseline We will register contact data (telephone number and/or mail address), and sociodemographic variables (age, sex and type of HF ) for patients who receive a HF educator contact and give informed consent. If it is an education-session post-discharge, we will ask if the patient had a contact with his/her GP.
We record patients' relevant risk criteria at discharge in the checklist.
We will record all yearly HF hospitalizations of patients in Groot-Leuven in the regional hospitals of UZ Leuven and Heilig Hart as our primary outcome for effectiveness (aggregated data). Secondary outcomes will be the number of yearly emergency room visits for HF and HF readmissions within 30 days. We will also extract these data for the previous 5 years, starting from 01.01.2014 to establish a time-series trend.
Process Evaluation
We will investigate the intervention implementation in a process evaluation. On a population level, we will look at yearly echocardiographies and cardiology consultations as a process indicator. In participating practices, we will monitor the number of registered HF diagnoses in the GPs EHR (coded or free-text). Process evaluation for specific guideline-recommended practices is as follows:
GP education GPs need to complete an online questionnaire before and after the web-based mandatory training session. The questionnaire assesses GP self-efficacy in the diagnosis and management of heart failure.
NT-proBNP We will look at the number of tests conducted per participating physician and the total number of tests performed in the largest regional lab (MCH Leuven).
HF educator We will register the number of conducted HF educator contacts and patient self-efficacy and quality of life at baseline and after 6 months as scored by the EHFScB-9 and SF-12 questionnaires respectively. We will perform a qualitative analysis of primary care professions' (GP , HF nurse, HF educator) and patients' experience of the introduction of this new role through semi-structured interviews.
Structured transitional protocol We will measure the total number of transitional contacts by proxy: the HF nurse in the hospital will fill in a standardized checklist in the EHR. Outcomes are the number of completed checklists and HF educator contacts after discharge. The HF educator verifies whether high-risk patients who gave informed consent saw their GP at the education session post-discharge.
Automated EHR audits We will record the proportion of HF patients with a registered left ventricular ejection fraction in the EHR, as well as the proportion of HFrEF patients with guideline-recommended medication (RAAS-blockade/B-blocker/MRA). We will look at the proportion of HF patients who had at least one contact with their GP in the last six months.
Data collection
At the patient level We will collect individual patient data for patients referred for a primary care HF educator consultation (by the GP or as part of the structured transmural protocol). Inclusion requires informed consent. The HF nurse will fill out a registration form with level of referral (GP or HF nurse in the hospital), contact information, sociodemographic data and an EHFScB-9 questionnaire assessing self-efficacy. We will repeat the questionnaire after 6 months via telephone or mail. The HF educator will record whether high-risk patients who gave informed consent saw their GP at the education session post-discharge.
At the care profession level We will collect the number of NT-proBNP tests at the participating lab. A yearly audit in the GPs EHR will record registered diagnoses and audit-specific outcomes.
At the population level (Groot-Leuven) Data collection for the primary outcome occurs at the hospital level through data already collected as part of the mandatory Minimale Ziekenhuisgegevens (MZG) registration for the population of Groot-Leuven (i.e. postal codes 3000, 3001, 3010, 3012, 3018, 3050). As part of the MZG registration, hospitals need to classify hospital stays according to diagnosis. Reimbursement of the hospital stay is dependent on the number of primary and secondary coded diagnoses. We define a HF hospitalization as a hospitalization with ICD-10 code I50 as the primary diagnosis. Data collection for echocardiographies and cardiology consultations occurs at the level of the Intermutual Agency (IMA). IMA is in charge of collecting administrative and medical data for all patients who have national health insurance.
For the transitional contact, we will collect the aggregated number of checklists and number of HF educator contacts after discharge. The number of completed checklists can be collected in the hospital EHR. The participating nursing organizations will collect the number of HF education sessions.
Data management
The PI and an assisting DMP coordinator will collect and enter data. All patient data is coded and pseudonymized. In pseudonymized data, we replace identifying particulars by an artificial identifier (i.e. a pseudonym). The list with pseudonyms, along with all other data is password-protected and stored in a secure encrypted cloud-drive (KU Leuven J-Drive). All other authors will have full access to the coded data (including the statistical reports and tables) in the study and will be able to take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Data analysis
We will perform descriptive statistics regarding the baseline sociodemographic variables of patients with a HF nurse consultation. We will longitudinally plot all other outcomes measured at population level during the study. We will use chi-square tests to compare self-efficacy outcomes for GPs and HF patients who have a HF nurse contact. This is a descriptive study, hence we provide no sample size analysis. As stated previously, the goal is to study the implementation process, not the effectiveness of various interventions. Because of its descriptive nature, we plan to cautiously interpret the results.
Ethics
Before the study start, we will present the participating GPs with an informed consent form that outlines the intervention and the purpose of the study. Additionally, the HF educator will inform all the patients who receive an education session about the study and ask for informed consent. It is impossible to collect informed consents at the regional level (hospitalizations, echocardiographies, specialist consultations …), although this is not an issue since the data are aggregated and anonymous. We received approval from the University Hospitals Leuven Ethics Committee in September 2019 (S62838).
- Conditions
- Heart Failure
- Being tested
- Improved primary care HF diagnostics, Heart Failure education, Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge care
- Keywords
- Primary Care, Community Care, General Practice, Self-management, Education, Transitional intervention, Chronic Care, Natriuretic Peptides, Audit and feedback, Electronic Health Record, GP training
- Medical subject headings
- Heart Failure
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Improved primary care HF diagnosticsOther
Reimbursement of natriuretic peptide testing for participating general practitioners (GPs) Audit and feedback in GPs EHR
Heart Failure educationOther
Reimbursement of heart failure education for patients at risk. Web-based training for participating general practitioners
Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge careOther
Checklist-supported discharge protocol for HF patients including telephone contact with patients' general practitioners and a contact with the HF educator
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Group Patients | Experimental | All HF patients that experience a HF education session Receives: Other: Improved primary care HF diagnostics; Other: Heart Failure education; Other: Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge care |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Yearly HF hospitalizations
Measured: Three years
Secondary outcomes (4)
Yearly cardiology consultations
Measured: Three years
Yearly echocardiographies
Measured: Three years
Registered HF diagnoses in the EHR
Measured: Three years
HF self-efficacy: EHFScBS-9 questionnaire
Patient self-efficacy as measured by the EHFScBS-9 questionnaire
Measured: At baseline and after 6 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted6 Apr 2020
- Study start4 Nov 2019
- Primary completion31 Dec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion31 Jul 2022 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (2)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Heart FailureStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by KU LeuvenThe 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 4
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 200 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- KU Leuven
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Willem Raat, KU Leuven
- Investigators
- Bert Vaes, Study director, KU Leuven
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04334447
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- S68238
- Status last verified
- Apr 2020
- First submitted
- 2 Apr 2020
- Last updated
- 6 Apr 2020
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Raat W, Smeets M, Van Pottelbergh G, Van de Putte M, Janssens S, Vaes B. Implementing heart failure disease management in primary care: a mixed-methods analysis of the IMPACT-B study. BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 20;15(7):e093414. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093414.
PubMed 40685241Raat W, Smeets M, Van Pottelbergh G, Van de Putte M, Janssens S, Vaes B. Implementing standards of care for heart failure patients in general practice - the IMPACT-B study protocol. Acta Cardiol. 2021 Jul;76(5):486-493. doi: 10.1080/00015385.2020.1844504. Epub 2020 Nov 9.
PubMed 33161831
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 6 Apr 2020. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Implementing Standards of Care for Heart Failure Patients in General Practice - A Regional Disease Management Program
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04334447
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- S68238
- Conditions
- Heart Failure
- Keywords
- Primary Care, Community Care, General Practice, Self-management, Education, Transitional intervention, Chronic Care, Natriuretic Peptides
- Phase
- Phase 4
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 200 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- KU LeuvenUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 4 Nov 2019 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Dec 2021 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 31 Jul 2022 (estimated)
- First posted
- 6 Apr 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.
Heart failure (HF) is an important health problem. Most chronic HF management occurs in primary care. Although guidelines exist, there is an important implementation gap in current HF care in Belgium. We will conduct a non-randomized, non-controlled prospective observational trial to implement guideline-recommended best clinical practices in primary care in Leuven, a region of ± 100.000 inhabitants. These best clinical practices include education of general practitioners, access to natriuretic peptides and audits in the electronic health record (EHR), training and implementation of HF educators in primary care and a structured post-discharge transition process . The main objective is to implement best clinical practices in a dynamic way and study the implementation process. We will evaluate the implementation of several guideline-recommended best clinical practices to optimize the diagnosis and treatment of heart failure in a real-world primary care setting.
Detailed description
The primary objective of this study is to establish a dynamic implementation environment for HF management in Leuven. It is not a primary objective to study the effect of various best clinical practices on the defined outcomes. We focus on the evolution in quality of HF management through an evaluation of the implementation process. Specific research questions are as follows:
- Do HF education and a learning environment improve the GPs' self-efficacy?
- Does reimbursement of the NT-proBNP test lead to implementation?
- How do primary care professionals and patients experience the introduction of a primary care HF educator?
- What is the adoption rate of a HF discharge checklist in hospitals' EHR? How do care professionals adhere to a checklist-supported structured discharge protocol?
- What is the feasibility of implementing automated audits in GPs EHR?
- Does this implementation study affect regional levels of HF hospitalization and readmissions?
Outcomes
Measurements at baseline We will register contact data (telephone number and/or mail address), and sociodemographic variables (age, sex and type of HF ) for patients who receive a HF educator contact and give informed consent. If it is an education-session post-discharge, we will ask if the patient had a contact with his/her GP.
We record patients' relevant risk criteria at discharge in the checklist.
We will record all yearly HF hospitalizations of patients in Groot-Leuven in the regional hospitals of UZ Leuven and Heilig Hart as our primary outcome for effectiveness (aggregated data). Secondary outcomes will be the number of yearly emergency room visits for HF and HF readmissions within 30 days. We will also extract these data for the previous 5 years, starting from 01.01.2014 to establish a time-series trend.
Process Evaluation
We will investigate the intervention implementation in a process evaluation. On a population level, we will look at yearly echocardiographies and cardiology consultations as a process indicator. In participating practices, we will monitor the number of registered HF diagnoses in the GPs EHR (coded or free-text). Process evaluation for specific guideline-recommended practices is as follows:
GP education GPs need to complete an online questionnaire before and after the web-based mandatory training session. The questionnaire assesses GP self-efficacy in the diagnosis and management of heart failure.
NT-proBNP We will look at the number of tests conducted per participating physician and the total number of tests performed in the largest regional lab (MCH Leuven).
HF educator We will register the number of conducted HF educator contacts and patient self-efficacy and quality of life at baseline and after 6 months as scored by the EHFScB-9 and SF-12 questionnaires respectively. We will perform a qualitative analysis of primary care professions' (GP , HF nurse, HF educator) and patients' experience of the introduction of this new role through semi-structured interviews.
Structured transitional protocol We will measure the total number of transitional contacts by proxy: the HF nurse in the hospital will fill in a standardized checklist in the EHR. Outcomes are the number of completed checklists and HF educator contacts after discharge. The HF educator verifies whether high-risk patients who gave informed consent saw their GP at the education session post-discharge.
Automated EHR audits We will record the proportion of HF patients with a registered left ventricular ejection fraction in the EHR, as well as the proportion of HFrEF patients with guideline-recommended medication (RAAS-blockade/B-blocker/MRA). We will look at the proportion of HF patients who had at least one contact with their GP in the last six months.
Data collection
At the patient level We will collect individual patient data for patients referred for a primary care HF educator consultation (by the GP or as part of the structured transmural protocol). Inclusion requires informed consent. The HF nurse will fill out a registration form with level of referral (GP or HF nurse in the hospital), contact information, sociodemographic data and an EHFScB-9 questionnaire assessing self-efficacy. We will repeat the questionnaire after 6 months via telephone or mail. The HF educator will record whether high-risk patients who gave informed consent saw their GP at the education session post-discharge.
At the care profession level We will collect the number of NT-proBNP tests at the participating lab. A yearly audit in the GPs EHR will record registered diagnoses and audit-specific outcomes.
At the population level (Groot-Leuven) Data collection for the primary outcome occurs at the hospital level through data already collected as part of the mandatory Minimale Ziekenhuisgegevens (MZG) registration for the population of Groot-Leuven (i.e. postal codes 3000, 3001, 3010, 3012, 3018, 3050). As part of the MZG registration, hospitals need to classify hospital stays according to diagnosis. Reimbursement of the hospital stay is dependent on the number of primary and secondary coded diagnoses. We define a HF hospitalization as a hospitalization with ICD-10 code I50 as the primary diagnosis. Data collection for echocardiographies and cardiology consultations occurs at the level of the Intermutual Agency (IMA). IMA is in charge of collecting administrative and medical data for all patients who have national health insurance.
For the transitional contact, we will collect the aggregated number of checklists and number of HF educator contacts after discharge. The number of completed checklists can be collected in the hospital EHR. The participating nursing organizations will collect the number of HF education sessions.
Data management
The PI and an assisting DMP coordinator will collect and enter data. All patient data is coded and pseudonymized. In pseudonymized data, we replace identifying particulars by an artificial identifier (i.e. a pseudonym). The list with pseudonyms, along with all other data is password-protected and stored in a secure encrypted cloud-drive (KU Leuven J-Drive). All other authors will have full access to the coded data (including the statistical reports and tables) in the study and will be able to take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.
Data analysis
We will perform descriptive statistics regarding the baseline sociodemographic variables of patients with a HF nurse consultation. We will longitudinally plot all other outcomes measured at population level during the study. We will use chi-square tests to compare self-efficacy outcomes for GPs and HF patients who have a HF nurse contact. This is a descriptive study, hence we provide no sample size analysis. As stated previously, the goal is to study the implementation process, not the effectiveness of various interventions. Because of its descriptive nature, we plan to cautiously interpret the results.
Ethics
Before the study start, we will present the participating GPs with an informed consent form that outlines the intervention and the purpose of the study. Additionally, the HF educator will inform all the patients who receive an education session about the study and ask for informed consent. It is impossible to collect informed consents at the regional level (hospitalizations, echocardiographies, specialist consultations …), although this is not an issue since the data are aggregated and anonymous. We received approval from the University Hospitals Leuven Ethics Committee in September 2019 (S62838).
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Health services research
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Intervention Group Patients | Experimental | Other: Improved primary care HF diagnostics, Other: Heart Failure education, Other: Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge careAll HF patients that experience a HF education session |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Diagnosis of HF
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- No pre-specified exclusion criteria
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Improved primary care HF diagnosticsReimbursement of natriuretic peptide testing for participating general practitioners (GPs) Audit and feedback in GPs EHR | Other | Intervention Group Patients |
| Heart Failure educationReimbursement of heart failure education for patients at risk. Web-based training for participating general practitioners | Other | Intervention Group Patients |
| Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge careChecklist-supported discharge protocol for HF patients including telephone contact with patients' general practitioners and a contact with the HF educator | Other | Intervention Group Patients |
Primary outcome
Yearly HF hospitalizations
Time frame: Three years
4 secondary outcomes
Yearly cardiology consultations
Time frame: Three years
Yearly echocardiographies
Time frame: Three years
Registered HF diagnoses in the EHR
Time frame: Three years
HF self-efficacy: EHFScBS-9 questionnaire
Time frame: At baseline and after 6 months
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 6 Apr 2020.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 40685241Raat W, Smeets M, Van Pottelbergh G, Van de Putte M, Janssens S, Vaes B. Implementing heart failure disease management in primary care: a mixed-methods analysis of the IMPACT-B study. BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 20;15(7):e093414. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-093414.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 33161831Raat W, Smeets M, Van Pottelbergh G, Van de Putte M, Janssens S, Vaes B. Implementing standards of care for heart failure patients in general practice - the IMPACT-B study protocol. Acta Cardiol. 2021 Jul;76(5):486-493. doi: 10.1080/00015385.2020.1844504. Epub 2020 Nov 9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Heart Failure
RecruitingPhase 4
The Effects of Ferric Derisomaltose in Patients With Acute Heart Failure and Iron Deficiency on Exercise Capacity and Quality of Life(COREVIVE-HFrEF)
Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction, Iron Deficiency
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
A Study of Bimagrumab in Participants With HFpEF
Heart Failure, Diastolic, Diastolic Heart Failure
Recruiting
Evaluation of a French Hospital Discharge Therapeutic Education Program by Nurses for Heart Failure Patient (EduSor)
Heart Failure
Active, not recruiting
Assessment of Combined CCM and ICD Device in HFrEF
Heart Failure, Heart Failure With Reduced Ejection Fraction
Not yet recruiting
RELIEVE-HFrEF TRIAL: REducing Lung congestIon Symptoms Using the v-wavE Shunt in adVancEd Heart Failure With Reduced EF
Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction, Heart Failure Chronic
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.
Bert Vaes study director
KU Leuven
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 4 study testing Improved primary care HF diagnostics, Heart Failure education and Structured transitional protocol planning post-discharge care in people with Heart Failure, run by KU Leuven at 1 site in Belgium.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: status not confirmed, as of the sponsor's last update on 6 Apr 2020. 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 Belgium. 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.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 4 studies take place after a treatment is approved, to learn more about its long-term benefits and risks in everyday use.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
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 Willem Raat (016 37 66 21, willem.raat@kuleuven.be), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Yearly HF hospitalizations (time frame: Three years). 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 NCT04334447, which also lists 2 linked publications.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 6 Apr 2020.