Colon PolypNCT04727814
Comparison of Polyp Detection and False Alarm Rates in Water Exchange and Air Insufflation Colonoscopy
An observational study of Colon Polyp, run by Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
Trial summary
Water exchange (WE) improves adenoma detection rate (ADR) but missed polyps occur due to human limitations. Computer-aided detection (CADe) improves polyp detection and can overcome human omissions, but a limiting factor is feces and air bubbles related false alarms (FA). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 40 to 80 years
- Conditions the study is for
- Colon Polyp
- What is being tested?
- Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysis
- How many people
- 250 participants
- Where
- 1 siteTaiwan
- Study dates
- 1 Aug 2020to 10 Apr 2021
- Phase
- Observational
- 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 40 to 80 years
- All sexes
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: Patients were undergoing screen, diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy were enrolled.
Who may be able to join
- Patients aged 40 to 80 years old, undergoing screen, diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy were enrolled.
Who cannot join
- Patients were excluded in case of having colonoscopy in the past 3 years, renal failure, previous colonic resection, scheduled for polypectomy, partial intake of bowel preparation, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) Risk Class 3 or higher, and lack of written informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Polyp Detection and False Alarm Rates by Computer-Aided Analysis of Videos of Withdrawal Phase of Colonoscopy in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Water Exchange Versus Air Insufflation
Water exchange (WE) improves adenoma detection rate (ADR) but missed polyps occur due to human limitations. Computer-aided detection (CADe) improves polyp detection and can overcome human omissions, but a limiting factor is feces and air bubbles related false alarms (FA). WE provides salvage cleansing and can potentially reduce FA. The investigators compared the additional polyp detection rate (APDR) and false alarm rate (FAR) by CADe between WE and air insufflation.
Read the detailed description
Worldwide colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer in women and the third in men. Early detection and removal of the colon polyps (cancer precursors) reduce the incidence of CRC. However, interval colon cancers still occur within 3-5 years after colonoscopy among patients of colonoscopists with low adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma. ADR was widely variable, suggesting that some adenomas were missed. Twenty six percent of adenomas were missed during tandem examination reported in a recent meta-analysis. Missed adenomas accounted for about 58% of interval cancers. Adenomas are more likely to be missed in the right colon than in other segments because of their flat morphology and hiding behind the accentuated folds and curvatures. Innovations in colonoscopy to increase ADR and decrease adenoma miss rate (AMR) hold the potential to reduce interval cancers.
The consensus statements in a recent modified Delphi review confirmed water exchange (WE) as a standardized insertion method produced less insertion pain, better bowel cleanliness and higher ADR than gas insufflation. It is characterized by infusing water to guide insertion in an airless lumen and almost simultaneous suctioning of the infused water during insertion, aiming at near-complete removal of the infused water and debris upon cecal intubation. Although an RCT with tandem examination showed WE significantly decreased right colon adenoma miss rate (rAMR) compared with CO2 insufflation (18.0% [33/183] vs. 34.6% [62/179], P = 0.0025), a considerable percentage of polyps in the right colon were still overlooked.
In recent years, the field of machine learning and artificial intelligence has made remarkable progress, and an increasing number of publications showed improved polyp detection rate (PDR) and ADR using computer-aided detection (CADe). CADe can detect polyps overlooked by the colonoscopist due to human limitations of inattention or inexperience. However, one major drawback of current CADe systems is false alarms (FAs), or false positives (FPs). Usually triggered by bubbles and fecal debris, FAs might distract the endoscopists with potential unfavorable effect on ADR. One study reported a FP rate of up to 60%.
In an overview on applying deep learning algorithms and WE in colonoscopy to improve adenoma detection, the authors noted that WE could enhance the performance of artificial intelligence (CADe) by improving bowel cleanliness and thus the exposure of polyps. In a follow-up review, the authors reported that artificial intelligence might mitigate operator-dependent factors that limited the potential of WE, while WE might provide the platform to optimize the performance of artificial intelligence by increasing bowel cleanliness and improving visualization, Therefore, the strengths of WE and artificial intelligence may complement the weaknesses of each other to maximize adenoma detection.
One of our recently completed studies compared right colon ADR evaluated by a blinded endoscopist using either air insufflation or WE for insertion, with all the colonoscopies video recorded (NCT02737514). We developed and applied a CADe system to detect the polyps in the videos. The current report is a proof of principle study to test the hypothesis that WE could yield a significantly higher additional PDR (APDR) and reduce false alarms rate (FAR) as compared to air insufflation in the right colon.
- Conditions
- Colon Polyp
- Being tested
- Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysis
- Keywords
- water exchange, polyp detection rate
- Medical subject headings
- Colonic Polyps
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysisOther
Analysis of computer-aided detection system overlaid videos from colonoscopies performed with water exchange or air insufflation method.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Water exchange with computer-aided detection system | Computer-aided detection system overlaid videos with water exchange colonoscopy method Receives: Other: Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysis | |
| Air insufflation with computer-aided detection system | Computer-aided detection system overlaid videos with air insufflation colonoscopy method Receives: Other: Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysis |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Polyp detection rate
To find out and compare the polyp detection rate on water exchange and air insufflation group
Measured: One month
Secondary outcomes (2)
False positive rate of computer-aided detection system
To find out and compare the false positive rates on water exchange and air insufflation group
Measured: One month
False alarm rate of computer-aided detection system
To find out and compare the false alarm rates on water exchange and air
Measured: One month
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted27 Jan 2021
- Study start1 Aug 2020
- Primary completion1 Sep 2020
- Study completion10 Apr 2021 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (10)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colon PolypStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 250 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of California, National Chiayi University
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Chia Pei Tang, Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital
- Investigators
- Chia Pei Tang, Principal investigator, Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04727814
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- B10903009
- Status last verified
- Apr 2021
- First submitted
- 18 Jan 2021
- Last updated
- 5 Apr 2021
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Cheng CL, Kuo YL, Hsieh YH, Tang JH, Leung FW. Comparison of Right Colon Adenoma Miss Rates Between Water Exchange and Carbon Dioxide Insufflation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2021 Nov-Dec 01;55(10):869-875. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001454.
PubMed 33074950Hsieh YH, Tseng CW, Hu CT, Koo M, Leung FW. Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy using water exchange, water immersion, and air insufflation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jul;86(1):192-201. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.005. Epub 2016 Dec 15.
PubMed 27988288Leung FW, Hsieh YH. Artificial intelligence (computer-assisted detection) is the most recent novel approach to increase adenoma detection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):86-88. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.07.059. No abstract available.
PubMed 33353642Wang P, Liu X, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, Liu P, Zhou C, Lei L, Li L, Guo Z, Lei S, Xiong F, Wang H, Song Y, Pan Y, Zhou G. Effect of a deep-learning computer-aided detection system on adenoma detection during colonoscopy (CADe-DB trial): a double-blind randomised study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Apr;5(4):343-351. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30411-X. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
PubMed 31981517Repici A, Badalamenti M, Maselli R, Correale L, Radaelli F, Rondonotti E, Ferrara E, Spadaccini M, Alkandari A, Fugazza A, Anderloni A, Galtieri PA, Pellegatta G, Carrara S, Di Leo M, Craviotto V, Lamonaca L, Lorenzetti R, Andrealli A, Antonelli G, Wallace M, Sharma P, Rosch T, Hassan C. Efficacy of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Randomized Trial. Gastroenterology. 2020 Aug;159(2):512-520.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.062. Epub 2020 May 1.
PubMed 32371116Barua I, Vinsard DG, Jodal HC, Loberg M, Kalager M, Holme O, Misawa M, Bretthauer M, Mori Y. Artificial intelligence for polyp detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Mar;53(3):277-284. doi: 10.1055/a-1201-7165. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
PubMed 32557490Hassan C, Spadaccini M, Iannone A, Maselli R, Jovani M, Chandrasekar VT, Antonelli G, Yu H, Areia M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Bhandari P, Sharma P, Rex DK, Rosch T, Wallace M, Repici A. Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):77-85.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059. Epub 2020 Jun 26.
PubMed 32598963Wang P, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, Bharadwaj S, Becq A, Xiao X, Liu P, Li L, Song Y, Zhang D, Li Y, Xu G, Tu M, Liu X. Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study. Gut. 2019 Oct;68(10):1813-1819. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317500. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
PubMed 30814121Hsieh YH, Leung FW. An overview of deep learning algorithms and water exchange in colonoscopy in improving adenoma detection. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Dec;13(12):1153-1160. doi: 10.1080/17474124.2019.1694903. Epub 2019 Nov 30.
PubMed 31755802Cadoni S, Ishaq S, Hassan C, Falt P, Fuccio L, Siau K, Leung JW, Anderson J, Binmoeller KF, Radaelli F, Rutter MD, Sugimoto S, Muhammad H, Bhandari P, Draganov PV, de Groen P, Wang AY, Yen AW, Hamerski C, Thorlacius H, Neumann H, Ramirez F, Mulder CJJ, Albeniz E, Amato A, Arai M, Bak A, Barret M, Bayupurnama P, Cheung R, Ching HL, Cohen H, Dolwani S, Friedland S, Harada H, Hsieh YH, Hayee B, Kuwai T, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Liggi M, Mizukami T, Mura D, Nylander D, Olafsson S, Paggi S, Pan Y, Parra-Blanco A, Ransford R, Rodriguez-Sanchez J, Senturk H, Suzuki N, Tseng CW, Uchima H, Uedo N, Leung FW. Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jun;93(6):1411-1420.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.10.011. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
PubMed 33069706
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 5 Apr 2021. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Polyp Detection and False Alarm Rates by Computer-Aided Analysis of Videos of Withdrawal Phase of Colonoscopy in a Randomized Controlled Trial of Water Exchange Versus Air Insufflation
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04727814
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- B10903009
- Conditions
- Colon Polyp
- Keywords
- water exchange, polyp detection rate
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Unknown status
- Enrolment
- 250 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Dalin Tzu Chi General HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of California, National Chiayi University
- Study start
- 1 Aug 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Study completion
- 10 Apr 2021 (estimated)
- First posted
- 27 Jan 2021 (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.
Water exchange (WE) improves adenoma detection rate (ADR) but missed polyps occur due to human limitations. Computer-aided detection (CADe) improves polyp detection and can overcome human omissions, but a limiting factor is feces and air bubbles related false alarms (FA). WE provides salvage cleansing and can potentially reduce FA. The investigators compared the additional polyp detection rate (APDR) and false alarm rate (FAR) by CADe between WE and air insufflation.
Detailed description
Worldwide colorectal cancer (CRC) is the second most common cancer in women and the third in men. Early detection and removal of the colon polyps (cancer precursors) reduce the incidence of CRC. However, interval colon cancers still occur within 3-5 years after colonoscopy among patients of colonoscopists with low adenoma detection rate (ADR), defined as the proportion of patients with at least one adenoma. ADR was widely variable, suggesting that some adenomas were missed. Twenty six percent of adenomas were missed during tandem examination reported in a recent meta-analysis. Missed adenomas accounted for about 58% of interval cancers. Adenomas are more likely to be missed in the right colon than in other segments because of their flat morphology and hiding behind the accentuated folds and curvatures. Innovations in colonoscopy to increase ADR and decrease adenoma miss rate (AMR) hold the potential to reduce interval cancers.
The consensus statements in a recent modified Delphi review confirmed water exchange (WE) as a standardized insertion method produced less insertion pain, better bowel cleanliness and higher ADR than gas insufflation. It is characterized by infusing water to guide insertion in an airless lumen and almost simultaneous suctioning of the infused water during insertion, aiming at near-complete removal of the infused water and debris upon cecal intubation. Although an RCT with tandem examination showed WE significantly decreased right colon adenoma miss rate (rAMR) compared with CO2 insufflation (18.0% [33/183] vs. 34.6% [62/179], P = 0.0025), a considerable percentage of polyps in the right colon were still overlooked.
In recent years, the field of machine learning and artificial intelligence has made remarkable progress, and an increasing number of publications showed improved polyp detection rate (PDR) and ADR using computer-aided detection (CADe). CADe can detect polyps overlooked by the colonoscopist due to human limitations of inattention or inexperience. However, one major drawback of current CADe systems is false alarms (FAs), or false positives (FPs). Usually triggered by bubbles and fecal debris, FAs might distract the endoscopists with potential unfavorable effect on ADR. One study reported a FP rate of up to 60%.
In an overview on applying deep learning algorithms and WE in colonoscopy to improve adenoma detection, the authors noted that WE could enhance the performance of artificial intelligence (CADe) by improving bowel cleanliness and thus the exposure of polyps. In a follow-up review, the authors reported that artificial intelligence might mitigate operator-dependent factors that limited the potential of WE, while WE might provide the platform to optimize the performance of artificial intelligence by increasing bowel cleanliness and improving visualization, Therefore, the strengths of WE and artificial intelligence may complement the weaknesses of each other to maximize adenoma detection.
One of our recently completed studies compared right colon ADR evaluated by a blinded endoscopist using either air insufflation or WE for insertion, with all the colonoscopies video recorded (NCT02737514). We developed and applied a CADe system to detect the polyps in the videos. The current report is a proof of principle study to test the hypothesis that WE could yield a significantly higher additional PDR (APDR) and reduce false alarms rate (FAR) as compared to air insufflation in the right colon.
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Water exchange with computer-aided detection system | – | Other: Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysisComputer-aided detection system overlaid videos with water exchange colonoscopy method |
| Air insufflation with computer-aided detection system | – | Other: Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysisComputer-aided detection system overlaid videos with air insufflation colonoscopy method |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 40 to 80 years
- Sex
- All
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- Patients were undergoing screen, diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy were enrolled.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients aged 40 to 80 years old, undergoing screen, diagnostic or surveillance colonoscopy were enrolled.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Patients were excluded in case of having colonoscopy in the past 3 years, renal failure, previous colonic resection, scheduled for polypectomy, partial intake of bowel preparation, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) Risk Class 3 or higher, and lack of written informed consent.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| Computer-aided detection system overlaid colonoscopy videos analysisAnalysis of computer-aided detection system overlaid videos from colonoscopies performed with water exchange or air insufflation method. | Other | Air insufflation with computer-aided detection system, Water exchange with computer-aided detection system |
Primary outcome
Polyp detection rate
Time frame: One month
To find out and compare the polyp detection rate on water exchange and air insufflation group
2 secondary outcomes
False positive rate of computer-aided detection system
Time frame: One month
False alarm rate of computer-aided detection system
Time frame: One month
Results and safety
Results are not available in the source record.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 5 Apr 2021.
- Background: PubMed 33074950Cheng CL, Kuo YL, Hsieh YH, Tang JH, Leung FW. Comparison of Right Colon Adenoma Miss Rates Between Water Exchange and Carbon Dioxide Insufflation: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2021 Nov-Dec 01;55(10):869-875. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001454.
- Background: PubMed 27988288Hsieh YH, Tseng CW, Hu CT, Koo M, Leung FW. Prospective multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing adenoma detection rate in colonoscopy using water exchange, water immersion, and air insufflation. Gastrointest Endosc. 2017 Jul;86(1):192-201. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.005. Epub 2016 Dec 15.
- Background: PubMed 33353642Leung FW, Hsieh YH. Artificial intelligence (computer-assisted detection) is the most recent novel approach to increase adenoma detection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):86-88. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.07.059. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 31981517Wang P, Liu X, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, Liu P, Zhou C, Lei L, Li L, Guo Z, Lei S, Xiong F, Wang H, Song Y, Pan Y, Zhou G. Effect of a deep-learning computer-aided detection system on adenoma detection during colonoscopy (CADe-DB trial): a double-blind randomised study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Apr;5(4):343-351. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(19)30411-X. Epub 2020 Jan 22.
- Background: PubMed 32371116Repici A, Badalamenti M, Maselli R, Correale L, Radaelli F, Rondonotti E, Ferrara E, Spadaccini M, Alkandari A, Fugazza A, Anderloni A, Galtieri PA, Pellegatta G, Carrara S, Di Leo M, Craviotto V, Lamonaca L, Lorenzetti R, Andrealli A, Antonelli G, Wallace M, Sharma P, Rosch T, Hassan C. Efficacy of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Randomized Trial. Gastroenterology. 2020 Aug;159(2):512-520.e7. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2020.04.062. Epub 2020 May 1.
- Background: PubMed 32557490Barua I, Vinsard DG, Jodal HC, Loberg M, Kalager M, Holme O, Misawa M, Bretthauer M, Mori Y. Artificial intelligence for polyp detection during colonoscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endoscopy. 2021 Mar;53(3):277-284. doi: 10.1055/a-1201-7165. Epub 2020 Sep 29.
- Background: PubMed 32598963Hassan C, Spadaccini M, Iannone A, Maselli R, Jovani M, Chandrasekar VT, Antonelli G, Yu H, Areia M, Dinis-Ribeiro M, Bhandari P, Sharma P, Rex DK, Rosch T, Wallace M, Repici A. Performance of artificial intelligence in colonoscopy for adenoma and polyp detection: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jan;93(1):77-85.e6. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.06.059. Epub 2020 Jun 26.
- Background: PubMed 30814121Wang P, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, Bharadwaj S, Becq A, Xiao X, Liu P, Li L, Song Y, Zhang D, Li Y, Xu G, Tu M, Liu X. Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study. Gut. 2019 Oct;68(10):1813-1819. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317500. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
- Background: PubMed 31755802Hsieh YH, Leung FW. An overview of deep learning algorithms and water exchange in colonoscopy in improving adenoma detection. Expert Rev Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2019 Dec;13(12):1153-1160. doi: 10.1080/17474124.2019.1694903. Epub 2019 Nov 30.
- Results publication: PubMed 33069706Cadoni S, Ishaq S, Hassan C, Falt P, Fuccio L, Siau K, Leung JW, Anderson J, Binmoeller KF, Radaelli F, Rutter MD, Sugimoto S, Muhammad H, Bhandari P, Draganov PV, de Groen P, Wang AY, Yen AW, Hamerski C, Thorlacius H, Neumann H, Ramirez F, Mulder CJJ, Albeniz E, Amato A, Arai M, Bak A, Barret M, Bayupurnama P, Cheung R, Ching HL, Cohen H, Dolwani S, Friedland S, Harada H, Hsieh YH, Hayee B, Kuwai T, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Liggi M, Mizukami T, Mura D, Nylander D, Olafsson S, Paggi S, Pan Y, Parra-Blanco A, Ransford R, Rodriguez-Sanchez J, Senturk H, Suzuki N, Tseng CW, Uchima H, Uedo N, Leung FW. Water-assisted colonoscopy: an international modified Delphi review on definitions and practice recommendations. Gastrointest Endosc. 2021 Jun;93(6):1411-1420.e18. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2020.10.011. Epub 2020 Oct 16.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Colon Polyp
Recruiting
Five or Ten Year Colonoscopy for 1-2 Non-Advanced Adenomatous Polyps
Adenocarcinoma of the Colon, Adenocarcinoma of the Rectum
Recruiting
Artificial Intelligence to Implement Cost-saving Strategies for Colonoscopy Screening Based on in Vivo Prediction of Polyp Histology
Colonic Neoplasms
RecruitingObservational study
KLF4 Epigenetic Modulation
KLF4 Methylation, Epigenetic
RecruitingObservational study
Malignant Polyp Registry
Malignant Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Cancer
Active, not recruiting
Virtual Incision Robotically Assisted Surgical Device Use in Minimally Invasive Colectomy
Colon Cancer, Colon Polyp
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.
Chia Pei Tang principal investigator
Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Colon Polyp, run by Dalin Tzu Chi General Hospital at 1 site in Taiwan.
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 5 Apr 2021. 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 Taiwan. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Results are not available in the source record.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
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?
Polyp detection rate (time frame: One month). 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 NCT04727814, which also lists 10 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 5 Apr 2021.