Consensus DevelopmentNCT05373966
Robotic Radical Nephroureterectomy Delphi Consensus
An observational study of Consensus Development, run by University of Southern California at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
The aim of this study is to develop a structured training program for robotic radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), based on a Delphi consensus among a panel of experts in this field. A standard questionnaire will be used to obtain experts' opinions on the training steps for robotic RNU. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Consensus Development
- What is being tested?
- Delphi Questionnaire
- How many people
- 24 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 1 Jul 2022to 15 Aug 2023
- 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 18 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: A team of experts in the field of robotic RNU, who are identified according to surgical experience, research and academic interest, expertise in running training courses, and participation in live-surgery cases.
Who may be able to join
- Experts in the field of robotic RNU
Who cannot join
- Panelists who were not able to commit to all rounds of the modified Delphi process
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Delphi Consensus on Robotic Radical Nephroureterectomy Curriculum
The aim of this study is to develop a structured training program for robotic radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), based on a Delphi consensus among a panel of experts in this field. A standard questionnaire will be used to obtain experts' opinions on the training steps for robotic RNU.
Read the detailed description
Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is an uncommon, yet biologically heterogeneous disease that accounts for 5-10% of all urothelial tumors. Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with bladder cuff excision is the gold standard for the treatment of UTUC patients. While this procedure is traditionally performed via an open approach, minimally invasive techniques have been used more frequently in recent years. A population-based analysis recently reported an increasing trend in the utilization of robotic RNU from 29% in 2010 to 53% in 2016. Robotic approach not only provides better visualization and optimal exposure during RNU but is also associated with improved perioperative outcomes compared to the open method.
Previous studies have shown that patients treated during the learning phase of a surgeon are at risk of inferior outcomes relative to those treated by experienced surgeons. To overcome such suboptimal outcomes, specific training curriculums have been proposed for some urologic procedures, such as robotic radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, and partial nephrectomy. Nevertheless, despite the widespread use of robot for RNU in recent years, no training program is currently available to assist urology residents during their learning process.
This study will provide the first training program for robotic RNU. This curriculum can help to track the progression of the trainee and ensure that defined benchmarks of skills will be reached before the trainee progresses to the next level of difficulty. In addition, it will ultimately improve patients' safety during the learning phase of the urologists.
- Conditions
- Consensus Development
- Being tested
- Delphi Questionnaire
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Delphi QuestionnaireOther
An invitation email, including a link to the survey, will be sent to the panel of experts in the field of robotic RNU. The Delphi questionnaire will be administered via Welphi.com.
In the first survey, panel members will outline the training program for robotic RNU.
In subsequent surveys, the expert panel will evaluate the modified criteria using a 1 to 5-point Likert scale with space provided for suggested edits and comments. Multiple rounds will be conducted until consensus is reached. After each round of Likert responses, the study team will calculate the agreement and distribution of responses. Likert responses will be dichotomized with positive values indicating agreement and neutral or negative values indicating disagreement.
For the questions that do not reach a consensus of more than 80% in the first round or need further explanation, additional rounds of the survey may be performed.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi Panel | A team of experts in the field of robotic RNU will be invited to participate in the current survey. These experts are identified according to surgical experience, research and academic interest, expertise in running training courses, and participation in live-surgery cases. Receives: Other: Delphi Questionnaire |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Degree of consensus
The level of agreement for all statements achieving consensus from the expert panel; consensus is predefined as ≥ 80% of the panel rating a given statement
Measured: 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 May 2022
- Study start1 Jul 2022
- Primary completion1 Jun 2023
- Study completion15 Aug 2023
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (12)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Consensus DevelopmentStudies 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
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Southern California
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Hooman Djaladat, University of Southern California
- Investigators
- Hooman Djaladat, MD, Principal investigator, University of Southern California
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05373966
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- UP-22-0032
- Status last verified
- Nov 2023
- First submitted
- 9 May 2022
- Last updated
- 30 Nov 2023
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No
Publications
Munoz JJ, Ellison LM. Upper tract urothelial neoplasms: incidence and survival during the last 2 decades. J Urol. 2000 Nov;164(5):1523-5.
PubMed 11025695Roupret M, Babjuk M, Burger M, Capoun O, Cohen D, Comperat EM, Cowan NC, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Gontero P, Hugh Mostafid A, Palou J, Peyronnet B, Seisen T, Soukup V, Sylvester RJ, Rhijn BWGV, Zigeuner R, Shariat SF. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: 2020 Update. Eur Urol. 2021 Jan;79(1):62-79. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.042. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
PubMed 32593530Kenigsberg AP, Smith W, Meng X, Ghandour R, Rapoport L, Bagrodia A, Lotan Y, Woldu SL, Margulis V. Robotic Nephroureterectomy vs Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy: Increased Utilization, Rates of Lymphadenectomy, Decreased Morbidity Robotically. J Endourol. 2021 Mar;35(3):312-318. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0496. Epub 2020 Nov 16.
PubMed 33081512Lee H, Kim HJ, Lee SE, Hong SK, Byun SS. Comparison of oncological and perioperative outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic nephroureterectomy approaches in patients with non-metastatic upper-tract urothelial carcinoma. PLoS One. 2019 Jan 8;14(1):e0210401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210401. eCollection 2019.
PubMed 30620766Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, Haynes AM, Matthews J, Rasiah K, Stricker PD. Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol. 2014 Mar;65(3):521-31. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.030. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
PubMed 24287319Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, Siriwardana AR, Haynes AM, Matthews J, Scheltema MJ, Stricker PD. Superior Biochemical Recurrence and Long-term Quality-of-life Outcomes Are Achievable with Robotic Radical Prostatectomy After a Long Learning Curve-Updated Analysis of a Prospective Single-surgeon Cohort of 2206 Consecutive Cases. Eur Urol. 2018 May;73(5):664-671. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.11.035. Epub 2017 Dec 19.
PubMed 29273404Veccia A, Carbonara U, Djaladat H, Mehazin R, Eun DD, Reese AC, Meng X, Uzzo R, Srivastava A, Porter J, Farrow JM, Jamil ML, Rosiello G, Tellini R, Mari A, Al-Qathani A, Rha KH, Wang L, Mastroianni R, Ferro M, De Cobelli O, Hakimi K, Crocerossa F, Ghoreifi A, Cacciamani G, Bhattu AS, Mottrie A, Abdollah F, Minervini A, Wu Z, Simone G, Derweesh I, Gonzalgo ML, Margulis V, Sundaram CP, Autorino R. Robotic vs Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multicenter Propensity-Score Matched Pair "tetrafecta" Analysis (ROBUUST Collaborative Group). J Endourol. 2022 Jun;36(6):752-759. doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0587. Epub 2022 Feb 25.
PubMed 35019760Veccia A, Carbonara U, Derweesh I, Mehrazin R, Porter J, Abdollah F, Mazzone E, Sundaram CP, Gonzalgo M, Mastroianni R, Ghoreifi A, Cacciamani GE, Patel D, Marcus J, Danno A, Steward J, Satish Bhattu A, Asghar A, Reese AC, Wu Z, Uzzo RG, Minervini A, Rha KH, Ferro M, Margulis V, Hampton LJ, Simone G, Eun DD, Djaladat H, Mottrie A, Autorino R. Single-stage Xi(R) robotic radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: surgical technique and outcomes. Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2022 Apr;74(2):233-241. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04247-8. Epub 2021 Mar 29.
PubMed 33781022Lovegrove C, Novara G, Mottrie A, Guru KA, Brown M, Challacombe B, Popert R, Raza J, Van der Poel H, Peabody J, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K. Structured and Modular Training Pathway for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP): Validation of the RARP Assessment Score and Learning Curve Assessment. Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):526-35. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.048. Epub 2015 Nov 14.
PubMed 26585582Volpe A, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P, Ficarra V, Novara G, van der Poel H, Mottrie A. Pilot Validation Study of the European Association of Urology Robotic Training Curriculum. Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):292-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.025. Epub 2014 Oct 31.
PubMed 25454612Dell'Oglio P, Turri F, Larcher A, D'Hondt F, Sanchez-Salas R, Bochner B, Palou J, Weston R, Hosseini A, Canda AE, Bjerggaard J, Cacciamani G, Olsen KO, Gill I, Piechaud T, Artibani W, van Leeuwen PJ, Stenzl A, Kelly J, Dasgupta P, Wijburg C, Collins JW, Desai M, van der Poel HG, Montorsi F, Wiklund P, Mottrie A; ERUS Educational Working Group and the YAU Working Group on Robot-assisted Surgery. Definition of a Structured Training Curriculum for Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Ileal Conduit in Male Patients: A Delphi Consensus Study Led by the ERUS Educational Board. Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Jan;8(1):160-164. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.12.015. Epub 2021 Jan 2.
PubMed 33402314Larcher A, De Naeyer G, Turri F, Dell'Oglio P, Capitanio U, Collins JW, Wiklund P, Van Der Poel H, Montorsi F, Mottrie A; ERUS Educational Working Group and the Young Academic Urologist Working Group on Robot-assisted Surgery. The ERUS Curriculum for Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Structure Definition and Pilot Clinical Validation. Eur Urol. 2019 Jun;75(6):1023-1031. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.031. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
PubMed 30979635
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 30 Nov 2023. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Delphi Consensus on Robotic Radical Nephroureterectomy Curriculum
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT05373966
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- UP-22-0032
- Conditions
- Consensus Development
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 24 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Southern CaliforniaUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jul 2022 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Jun 2023 (actual)
- Study completion
- 15 Aug 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 13 May 2022 (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 aim of this study is to develop a structured training program for robotic radical nephroureterectomy (RNU), based on a Delphi consensus among a panel of experts in this field. A standard questionnaire will be used to obtain experts' opinions on the training steps for robotic RNU.
Detailed description
Upper tract urothelial carcinoma (UTUC) is an uncommon, yet biologically heterogeneous disease that accounts for 5-10% of all urothelial tumors. Radical nephroureterectomy (RNU) with bladder cuff excision is the gold standard for the treatment of UTUC patients. While this procedure is traditionally performed via an open approach, minimally invasive techniques have been used more frequently in recent years. A population-based analysis recently reported an increasing trend in the utilization of robotic RNU from 29% in 2010 to 53% in 2016. Robotic approach not only provides better visualization and optimal exposure during RNU but is also associated with improved perioperative outcomes compared to the open method.
Previous studies have shown that patients treated during the learning phase of a surgeon are at risk of inferior outcomes relative to those treated by experienced surgeons. To overcome such suboptimal outcomes, specific training curriculums have been proposed for some urologic procedures, such as robotic radical prostatectomy, radical cystectomy, and partial nephrectomy. Nevertheless, despite the widespread use of robot for RNU in recent years, no training program is currently available to assist urology residents during their learning process.
This study will provide the first training program for robotic RNU. This curriculum can help to track the progression of the trainee and ensure that defined benchmarks of skills will be reached before the trainee progresses to the next level of difficulty. In addition, it will ultimately improve patients' safety during the learning phase of the urologists.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi Panel | – | Other: Delphi QuestionnaireA team of experts in the field of robotic RNU will be invited to participate in the current survey. These experts are identified according to surgical experience, research and academic interest, expertise in running training courses, and participation in live-surgery cases. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- A team of experts in the field of robotic RNU, who are identified according to surgical experience, research and academic interest, expertise in running training courses, and participation in live-surgery cases.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Experts in the field of robotic RNU
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Panelists who were not able to commit to all rounds of the modified Delphi process
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Delphi QuestionnaireAn invitation email, including a link to the survey, will be sent to the panel of experts in the field of robotic RNU. The Delphi questionnaire will be administered via Welphi.com. In the first survey, panel members will outline the training program for robotic RNU. In subsequent surveys, the expert panel will evaluate the modified criteria using a 1 to 5-point Likert scale with space provided for suggested edits and comments. Multiple rounds will be conducted until consensus is reached. After each round of Likert responses, the study team will calculate the agreement and distribution of responses. Likert responses will be dichotomized with positive values indicating agreement and neutral or negative values indicating disagreement. For the questions that do not reach a consensus of more than 80% in the first round or need further explanation, additional rounds of the survey may be performed. | Other | Delphi Panel |
Primary outcome
Degree of consensus
Time frame: 12 months
The level of agreement for all statements achieving consensus from the expert panel; consensus is predefined as ≥ 80% of the panel rating a given statement
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 30 Nov 2023.
- Background: PubMed 11025695Munoz JJ, Ellison LM. Upper tract urothelial neoplasms: incidence and survival during the last 2 decades. J Urol. 2000 Nov;164(5):1523-5.
- Background: PubMed 32593530Roupret M, Babjuk M, Burger M, Capoun O, Cohen D, Comperat EM, Cowan NC, Dominguez-Escrig JL, Gontero P, Hugh Mostafid A, Palou J, Peyronnet B, Seisen T, Soukup V, Sylvester RJ, Rhijn BWGV, Zigeuner R, Shariat SF. European Association of Urology Guidelines on Upper Urinary Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: 2020 Update. Eur Urol. 2021 Jan;79(1):62-79. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2020.05.042. Epub 2020 Jun 24.
- Background: PubMed 33081512Kenigsberg AP, Smith W, Meng X, Ghandour R, Rapoport L, Bagrodia A, Lotan Y, Woldu SL, Margulis V. Robotic Nephroureterectomy vs Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy: Increased Utilization, Rates of Lymphadenectomy, Decreased Morbidity Robotically. J Endourol. 2021 Mar;35(3):312-318. doi: 10.1089/end.2020.0496. Epub 2020 Nov 16.
- Background: PubMed 30620766Lee H, Kim HJ, Lee SE, Hong SK, Byun SS. Comparison of oncological and perioperative outcomes of open, laparoscopic, and robotic nephroureterectomy approaches in patients with non-metastatic upper-tract urothelial carcinoma. PLoS One. 2019 Jan 8;14(1):e0210401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0210401. eCollection 2019.
- Background: PubMed 24287319Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, Haynes AM, Matthews J, Rasiah K, Stricker PD. Superior quality of life and improved surgical margins are achievable with robotic radical prostatectomy after a long learning curve: a prospective single-surgeon study of 1552 consecutive cases. Eur Urol. 2014 Mar;65(3):521-31. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2013.10.030. Epub 2013 Oct 31.
- Background: PubMed 29273404Thompson JE, Egger S, Bohm M, Siriwardana AR, Haynes AM, Matthews J, Scheltema MJ, Stricker PD. Superior Biochemical Recurrence and Long-term Quality-of-life Outcomes Are Achievable with Robotic Radical Prostatectomy After a Long Learning Curve-Updated Analysis of a Prospective Single-surgeon Cohort of 2206 Consecutive Cases. Eur Urol. 2018 May;73(5):664-671. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2017.11.035. Epub 2017 Dec 19.
- Background: PubMed 35019760Veccia A, Carbonara U, Djaladat H, Mehazin R, Eun DD, Reese AC, Meng X, Uzzo R, Srivastava A, Porter J, Farrow JM, Jamil ML, Rosiello G, Tellini R, Mari A, Al-Qathani A, Rha KH, Wang L, Mastroianni R, Ferro M, De Cobelli O, Hakimi K, Crocerossa F, Ghoreifi A, Cacciamani G, Bhattu AS, Mottrie A, Abdollah F, Minervini A, Wu Z, Simone G, Derweesh I, Gonzalgo ML, Margulis V, Sundaram CP, Autorino R. Robotic vs Laparoscopic Nephroureterectomy for Upper Tract Urothelial Carcinoma: A Multicenter Propensity-Score Matched Pair "tetrafecta" Analysis (ROBUUST Collaborative Group). J Endourol. 2022 Jun;36(6):752-759. doi: 10.1089/end.2021.0587. Epub 2022 Feb 25.
- Background: PubMed 33781022Veccia A, Carbonara U, Derweesh I, Mehrazin R, Porter J, Abdollah F, Mazzone E, Sundaram CP, Gonzalgo M, Mastroianni R, Ghoreifi A, Cacciamani GE, Patel D, Marcus J, Danno A, Steward J, Satish Bhattu A, Asghar A, Reese AC, Wu Z, Uzzo RG, Minervini A, Rha KH, Ferro M, Margulis V, Hampton LJ, Simone G, Eun DD, Djaladat H, Mottrie A, Autorino R. Single-stage Xi(R) robotic radical nephroureterectomy for upper tract urothelial carcinoma: surgical technique and outcomes. Minerva Urol Nephrol. 2022 Apr;74(2):233-241. doi: 10.23736/S2724-6051.21.04247-8. Epub 2021 Mar 29.
- Results publication: PubMed 26585582Lovegrove C, Novara G, Mottrie A, Guru KA, Brown M, Challacombe B, Popert R, Raza J, Van der Poel H, Peabody J, Dasgupta P, Ahmed K. Structured and Modular Training Pathway for Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy (RARP): Validation of the RARP Assessment Score and Learning Curve Assessment. Eur Urol. 2016 Mar;69(3):526-35. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.10.048. Epub 2015 Nov 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 25454612Volpe A, Ahmed K, Dasgupta P, Ficarra V, Novara G, van der Poel H, Mottrie A. Pilot Validation Study of the European Association of Urology Robotic Training Curriculum. Eur Urol. 2015 Aug;68(2):292-9. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2014.10.025. Epub 2014 Oct 31.
- Results publication: PubMed 33402314Dell'Oglio P, Turri F, Larcher A, D'Hondt F, Sanchez-Salas R, Bochner B, Palou J, Weston R, Hosseini A, Canda AE, Bjerggaard J, Cacciamani G, Olsen KO, Gill I, Piechaud T, Artibani W, van Leeuwen PJ, Stenzl A, Kelly J, Dasgupta P, Wijburg C, Collins JW, Desai M, van der Poel HG, Montorsi F, Wiklund P, Mottrie A; ERUS Educational Working Group and the YAU Working Group on Robot-assisted Surgery. Definition of a Structured Training Curriculum for Robot-assisted Radical Cystectomy with Intracorporeal Ileal Conduit in Male Patients: A Delphi Consensus Study Led by the ERUS Educational Board. Eur Urol Focus. 2022 Jan;8(1):160-164. doi: 10.1016/j.euf.2020.12.015. Epub 2021 Jan 2.
- Results publication: PubMed 30979635Larcher A, De Naeyer G, Turri F, Dell'Oglio P, Capitanio U, Collins JW, Wiklund P, Van Der Poel H, Montorsi F, Mottrie A; ERUS Educational Working Group and the Young Academic Urologist Working Group on Robot-assisted Surgery. The ERUS Curriculum for Robot-assisted Partial Nephrectomy: Structure Definition and Pilot Clinical Validation. Eur Urol. 2019 Jun;75(6):1023-1031. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2019.02.031. Epub 2019 Apr 9.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
Related trials for Consensus Development
RecruitingObservational study
Development of Context-Adapted Quality Indicators for Early Sepsis Care in Sub-Saharan Africa - A Modified Delphi Consensus Procedure
Sepsis
RecruitingObservational study
Cardiothoracic Critical Care as Subspecialty and Its Core Competencies
Consensus Development
RecruitingObservational study
Development of an Italian Questionnaire for Splenectomized Patients Using a Delphi Consensus Method
Splenectomy; Status, Asplenia
Active, not recruitingObservational study
Definition for the Assessment of Time-to-event Endpoints in CANcer Trials (DATECAN-1)
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.
Hooman Djaladat, MD principal investigator
University of Southern California
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 Consensus Development, run by University of Southern California at 1 site in United States.
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: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 30 Nov 2023. 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 United States. 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?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
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?
Degree of consensus (time frame: 12 months). 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 NCT05373966, which also lists 12 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 30 Nov 2023.