Colorectal PolypNCT06186778
The Impact of Repeated Colonoscopic Insert Method on the Detection Rate of Adenomas in the Sigmoid Colon
A study testing secondary colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy in people with Colorectal Polyp, run by Jianning Yao at 1 site in China.
Trial summary
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumour originating from the colorectal mucosal epithelium, with rising incidence and mortality rates. Approximately 90% of CRC develops from colorectal polyps, which are considered precancerous lesions of CRC, especially adenomatous polyps. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 45 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Colorectal Polyp
- What is being tested?
- secondary colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy
- Type of treatment
- Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 650 participants
- Where
- 1 siteChina
- Study dates
- 1 Jan 2024to 29 May 2024
- 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 45 years and older
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patients who underwent painless colonoscopy at the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University and signed the informed consent for the clinical trial;
- Aged at age 45 and above with BMI >24.
Who cannot join
- Patients with contraindications to colonoscopy: patients with acute diverticulitis, patients with known or suspected perforation, patients with severe cardiovascular and cerebrovascular lesions, patients with severe hepatic or renal insufficiency, patients with abdominal aneurysm of large arteries, patients with active hemorrhagic descending colonic lesions, patients with acute radiological colorectal inflammation, patients with advanced carcinomas with pelvic metastases or obvious ascites, patients with severe and extensive intestinal adhesions after abdominal or pelvic surgery;
- Patients with inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal cancer, familial adenomatous polyposis, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, abdominal wall hernia, patients with a history of colorectal surgery;
- Patients with incomplete colonoscopy, i.e., those in whom the endoscopist has failed to successfully cannulate the cecum due to technical difficulties;
- Patients with poor bowel preparation, i.e., patients with a total score of <6 or any bowel segment of <2 on the Boston Bowel Preparedness Scale score for poor bowel preparation).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumour originating from the colorectal mucosal epithelium, with rising incidence and mortality rates. Approximately 90% of CRC develops from colorectal polyps, which are considered precancerous lesions of CRC, especially adenomatous polyps. If removed endoscopically during the polyp stage, 70%-90% of CRC can be prevented. However, current colonoscopy examinations have a high miss rate for polyps. Studies have shown that the miss rates for polyps and adenomas after colonoscopy can reach 22%-28% and 12%-26%, respectively.
The "2014 Chinese Guidelines for Early Screening and Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer" mentions that the observation method during colonoscopy starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal. However, in actual clinical practice, it is found that single withdrawal observation is not enough, as this examination approach is prone to many missed polyps. The likely reason is that the colon is in a compressed state during withdrawal observation. Single-operator colonoscopy is currently the mainstream insertion method internationally, and the essence of the single-operator technique is "short-axis reductions", meaning that the colonoscope maintains a straight configuration throughout the entire examination. The average adult colon length is about 1.5m, but the distance reached by the colonoscope during the single-operator technique is often between 70-80cm, indicating compression of the colon. In addition, colonic folds become more dense when compressed, making it easier for lesions like polyps to hide within or near folds, leading to misses.
The sigmoid colon, with the most turns in the entire large intestine, is also the part most prone to compression during colonoscopy insertion. Correspondingly, it is also more prone to misses during withdrawal observation. Although some scholars proposed repeating withdrawal to improve lesion detection rates, whether it is performed twice or three times, only compressed colons are observed. In actual clinical work, many polyps can only be found during insertion. The investigators propose performing a second insert specifically for the easily compressed sigmoid colon. During the second insert, the "short-axis reduction" technique should not be used. Instead, the folds should be deliberately advanced into, which helps fully extend the compressed sigmoid colon to shallow or eliminate the folds, allowing observation during advancement to achieve effects beyond multiple withdrawals, finding hidden lesions within or near folds to improve colonoscopy quality. Therefore, to explore whether observing during a second sigmoid colon advancement can further improve the adenoma detection rate to improve colonoscopy quality and reduce interval cancers, the investigators conducted this study.
Read the detailed description
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumour originating from the colorectal mucosal epithelium, with rising incidence and mortality rates. Currently, CRC ranks third in incidence and second in mortality among all cancers worldwide, making it the leading cancer in terms of global incidence and mortality. Approximately 90% of CRC develops from colorectal polyps, which are considered precancerous lesions of CRC, especially adenomatous polyps. If removed endoscopically during the polyp stage, 70%-90% of CRC can be prevented. However, current colonoscopy examinations have a high miss rate for polyps. Studies have shown that the miss rates for polyps and adenomas after colonoscopy can reach 22%-28% and 12%-26%, respectively.
The "2014 Chinese Guidelines for Early Screening and Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer" mentions that the observation method during colonoscopy starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon to the rectum. Current quality control of colonoscopy mainly focuses on controlling withdrawal time exceeding 6 minutes, controlling cecal intubation rate, and ensuring adenoma detection rate, without specific requirements on the observation method. However, in actual clinical practice, it is found that single withdrawal observation is not enough, as this examination approach is prone to many missed polyps. The likely reason is that the colon is in a compressed state during withdrawal observation. Single-operator colonoscopy is currently the mainstream insertion method internationally, and the essence of the single-operator technique is "short-axis reductions", meaning that the colonoscope maintains a straight configuration throughout the entire examination. The average adult colon length is about 1.5m, but the distance reached by the colonoscope during the single-operator technique is often between 70-80cm, indicating compression of the colon. In addition, colonic folds become more dense when compressed, making it easier for lesions like polyps to hide within or near folds, leading to misses. Currently, in the clinical practice of colonoscopy, only withdrawal observation is performed, and only once, on a compressed colon. Many lesions can be easily missed.
The sigmoid colon, with the most turns in the entire large intestine, is also the part most prone to compression during colonoscopy insertion. Correspondingly, it is also more prone to misses during withdrawal observation. Although some scholars proposed repeating withdrawal to improve lesion detection rates, whether it is performed twice or three times, only compressed colons are observed. In actual clinical work, many polyps can only be found during advancement. The investigators propose performing a second advancement specifically for the easily compressed sigmoid colon. During the second advancement, the "short-axis reduction" technique should not be used. Instead, the folds should be deliberately advanced into, which helps fully extend the compressed sigmoid colon to shallow or eliminate the folds, allowing observation during advancement to achieve effects beyond multiple withdrawals, finding hidden lesions within or near folds to improve colonoscopy quality. Therefore, to explore whether observing during a second sigmoid colon advancement can further improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR) to improve colonoscopy quality and reduce interval cancers, the investigators conducted this study.
- Conditions
- Colorectal Polyp
- Being tested
- secondary colonoscopy, conventional colonoscopy
- Keywords
- colorectal polyps, colonoscopy, repeat colonoscopy, detection rate, sigmoid colon
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
secondary colonoscopyProcedure or surgery
After the routine colonoscopy, a repeat colonoscopy of the sigmoid colon is performed
conventional colonoscopyProcedure or surgery
It starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, and sigmoid colon to the rectum.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| conventional colonoscopy group | Active comparator | It starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, and sigmoid colon to the rectum. Receives: Procedure: conventional colonoscopy |
| secondary colonoscopy group | Experimental | After the routine colonoscopy, a repeat colonoscopy of the sigmoid colon is performed Receives: Procedure: secondary colonoscopy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Detection rate of sigmoid colon adenoma
Number of patients with adenomas detected in the sigmoid colon in each group/number of patients examined in each group
Measured: 3 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Detection rate of sigmoid colon polyps
Number of patients with polyps detected in the sigmoid colon in each group/number of patients examined in each group
Measured: 3 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted2 Jan 2024
- Study start1 Jan 2024
- Primary completion30 Apr 2024
- Study completion29 May 2024
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (21)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colorectal 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
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase N/A
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Participant
- Enrolment
- 650 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Jianning Yao
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor-investigator, Jianning Yao, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06186778
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2023-KY-1332-002
- Status last verified
- Jun 2024
- First submitted
- 25 Nov 2023
- Last updated
- 10 Jun 2024
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Arnold M, Sierra MS, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Gut. 2017 Apr;66(4):683-691. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310912. Epub 2016 Jan 27.
PubMed 26818619Shaukat A, Kahi CJ, Burke CA, Rabeneck L, Sauer BG, Rex DK. ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021 Mar 1;116(3):458-479. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001122.
PubMed 33657038Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492. Epub 2018 Sep 12.
PubMed 30207593Song M, Emilsson L, Bozorg SR, Nguyen LH, Joshi AD, Staller K, Nayor J, Chan AT, Ludvigsson JF. Risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after polypectomy: a Swedish record-linkage study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jun;5(6):537-547. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30009-1. Epub 2020 Mar 17.
PubMed 32192628Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O'Brien MJ, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Hankey BF, Shi W, Bond JH, Schapiro M, Panish JF, Stewart ET, Waye JD. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):687-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100370.
PubMed 22356322Zhao S, Wang S, Pan P, Xia T, Chang X, Yang X, Guo L, Meng Q, Yang F, Qian W, Xu Z, Wang Y, Wang Z, Gu L, Wang R, Jia F, Yao J, Li Z, Bai Y. Magnitude, Risk Factors, and Factors Associated With Adenoma Miss Rate of Tandem Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2019 May;156(6):1661-1674.e11. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.260. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
PubMed 30738046Martinez ME, Baron JA, Lieberman DA, Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Jiang R, Ahnen DJ, Bond JH, Church TR, Robertson DJ, Smith-Warner SA, Jacobs ET, Alberts DS, Greenberg ER. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology. 2009 Mar;136(3):832-41. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.12.007. Epub 2008 Dec 9.
PubMed 19171141Cooper GS, Xu F, Barnholtz Sloan JS, Schluchter MD, Koroukian SM. Prevalence and predictors of interval colorectal cancers in medicare beneficiaries. Cancer. 2012 Jun 15;118(12):3044-52. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26602. Epub 2011 Oct 11.
PubMed 21989586Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, Polkowski M, Wojciechowska U, Didkowska J, Zwierko M, Rupinski M, Nowacki MP, Butruk E. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010 May 13;362(19):1795-803. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907667.
PubMed 20463339Corley DA, Levin TR, Doubeni CA. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014 Jun 26;370(26):2541. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1405329. No abstract available.
PubMed 24963577Sawicki T, Ruszkowska M, Danielewicz A, Niedzwiedzka E, Arlukowicz T, Przybylowicz KE. A Review of Colorectal Cancer in Terms of Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Development, Symptoms and Diagnosis. Cancers (Basel). 2021 Apr 22;13(9):2025. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092025.
PubMed 33922197May FP, Shaukat A. State of the Science on Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy and How to Achieve Them. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Aug;115(8):1183-1190. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000622.
PubMed 32759620Shao PP, Bui A, Romero T, Jia H, Leung FW. Adenoma and Advanced Adenoma Detection Rates of Water Exchange, Endocuff, and Cap Colonoscopy: A Network Meta-Analysis with Pooled Data of Randomized Controlled Trials. Dig Dis Sci. 2021 Apr;66(4):1175-1188. doi: 10.1007/s10620-020-06324-0. Epub 2020 May 25.
PubMed 32451757Chang TL, Lewis B, Deutsch N, Nulsen B. Changes in Adenoma Detection Rate From Full-Spectrum Endoscopy to Standard Forward-Viewing Endoscopy. J Clin Gastroenterol. 2023 Apr 1;57(4):404-409. doi: 10.1097/MCG.0000000000001706.
PubMed 35470297Calcara C, Aseni P, Siau K, Gambitta P, Cadoni S. Water immersion sigmoidoscopy versus standard insufflation for colorectal cancer screening: A cohort study. Saudi J Gastroenterol. 2022 Jan-Feb;28(1):39-45. doi: 10.4103/sjg.sjg_198_21.
PubMed 34494603
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 10 Jun 2024. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- The Impact of Repeated Colonoscopic Insert Method on the Detection Rate of Adenomas in the Sigmoid Colon
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06186778
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 2023-KY-1332-002
- Conditions
- Colorectal Polyp
- Keywords
- colorectal polyps, colonoscopy, repeat colonoscopy, detection rate, sigmoid colon
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 650 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Jianning YaoUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 1 Jan 2024 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Apr 2024 (actual)
- Study completion
- 29 May 2024 (actual)
- First posted
- 2 Jan 2024 (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.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumour originating from the colorectal mucosal epithelium, with rising incidence and mortality rates. Approximately 90% of CRC develops from colorectal polyps, which are considered precancerous lesions of CRC, especially adenomatous polyps. If removed endoscopically during the polyp stage, 70%-90% of CRC can be prevented. However, current colonoscopy examinations have a high miss rate for polyps. Studies have shown that the miss rates for polyps and adenomas after colonoscopy can reach 22%-28% and 12%-26%, respectively.
The "2014 Chinese Guidelines for Early Screening and Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer" mentions that the observation method during colonoscopy starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal. However, in actual clinical practice, it is found that single withdrawal observation is not enough, as this examination approach is prone to many missed polyps. The likely reason is that the colon is in a compressed state during withdrawal observation. Single-operator colonoscopy is currently the mainstream insertion method internationally, and the essence of the single-operator technique is "short-axis reductions", meaning that the colonoscope maintains a straight configuration throughout the entire examination. The average adult colon length is about 1.5m, but the distance reached by the colonoscope during the single-operator technique is often between 70-80cm, indicating compression of the colon. In addition, colonic folds become more dense when compressed, making it easier for lesions like polyps to hide within or near folds, leading to misses.
The sigmoid colon, with the most turns in the entire large intestine, is also the part most prone to compression during colonoscopy insertion. Correspondingly, it is also more prone to misses during withdrawal observation. Although some scholars proposed repeating withdrawal to improve lesion detection rates, whether it is performed twice or three times, only compressed colons are observed. In actual clinical work, many polyps can only be found during insertion. The investigators propose performing a second insert specifically for the easily compressed sigmoid colon. During the second insert, the "short-axis reduction" technique should not be used. Instead, the folds should be deliberately advanced into, which helps fully extend the compressed sigmoid colon to shallow or eliminate the folds, allowing observation during advancement to achieve effects beyond multiple withdrawals, finding hidden lesions within or near folds to improve colonoscopy quality. Therefore, to explore whether observing during a second sigmoid colon advancement can further improve the adenoma detection rate to improve colonoscopy quality and reduce interval cancers, the investigators conducted this study.
Detailed description
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is a malignant tumour originating from the colorectal mucosal epithelium, with rising incidence and mortality rates. Currently, CRC ranks third in incidence and second in mortality among all cancers worldwide, making it the leading cancer in terms of global incidence and mortality. Approximately 90% of CRC develops from colorectal polyps, which are considered precancerous lesions of CRC, especially adenomatous polyps. If removed endoscopically during the polyp stage, 70%-90% of CRC can be prevented. However, current colonoscopy examinations have a high miss rate for polyps. Studies have shown that the miss rates for polyps and adenomas after colonoscopy can reach 22%-28% and 12%-26%, respectively.
The "2014 Chinese Guidelines for Early Screening and Endoscopic Diagnosis and Treatment of Colorectal Cancer" mentions that the observation method during colonoscopy starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, sigmoid colon to the rectum. Current quality control of colonoscopy mainly focuses on controlling withdrawal time exceeding 6 minutes, controlling cecal intubation rate, and ensuring adenoma detection rate, without specific requirements on the observation method. However, in actual clinical practice, it is found that single withdrawal observation is not enough, as this examination approach is prone to many missed polyps. The likely reason is that the colon is in a compressed state during withdrawal observation. Single-operator colonoscopy is currently the mainstream insertion method internationally, and the essence of the single-operator technique is "short-axis reductions", meaning that the colonoscope maintains a straight configuration throughout the entire examination. The average adult colon length is about 1.5m, but the distance reached by the colonoscope during the single-operator technique is often between 70-80cm, indicating compression of the colon. In addition, colonic folds become more dense when compressed, making it easier for lesions like polyps to hide within or near folds, leading to misses. Currently, in the clinical practice of colonoscopy, only withdrawal observation is performed, and only once, on a compressed colon. Many lesions can be easily missed.
The sigmoid colon, with the most turns in the entire large intestine, is also the part most prone to compression during colonoscopy insertion. Correspondingly, it is also more prone to misses during withdrawal observation. Although some scholars proposed repeating withdrawal to improve lesion detection rates, whether it is performed twice or three times, only compressed colons are observed. In actual clinical work, many polyps can only be found during advancement. The investigators propose performing a second advancement specifically for the easily compressed sigmoid colon. During the second advancement, the "short-axis reduction" technique should not be used. Instead, the folds should be deliberately advanced into, which helps fully extend the compressed sigmoid colon to shallow or eliminate the folds, allowing observation during advancement to achieve effects beyond multiple withdrawals, finding hidden lesions within or near folds to improve colonoscopy quality. Therefore, to explore whether observing during a second sigmoid colon advancement can further improve the adenoma detection rate (ADR) to improve colonoscopy quality and reduce interval cancers, the investigators conducted this study.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- Single blind (participant)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| conventional colonoscopy group | Active comparator | Procedure: conventional colonoscopyIt starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, and sigmoid colon to the rectum. |
| secondary colonoscopy group | Experimental | Procedure: secondary colonoscopyAfter the routine colonoscopy, a repeat colonoscopy of the sigmoid colon is performed |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 45 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patients who underwent painless colonoscopy at the Gastrointestinal Endoscopy Center of the First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University and signed the informed consent for the clinical trial;
- Aged at age 45 and above with BMI >24.
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Patients with contraindications to colonoscopy: patients with acute diverticulitis, patients with known or suspected perforation, patients with severe cardiovascular and cerebrovascular lesions, patients with severe hepatic or renal insufficiency, patients with abdominal aneurysm of large arteries, patients with active hemorrhagic descending colonic lesions, patients with acute radiological colorectal inflammation, patients with advanced carcinomas with pelvic metastases or obvious ascites, patients with severe and extensive intestinal adhesions after abdominal or pelvic surgery;
- Patients with inflammatory bowel disease, colorectal cancer, familial adenomatous polyposis, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, abdominal wall hernia, patients with a history of colorectal surgery;
- Patients with incomplete colonoscopy, i.e., those in whom the endoscopist has failed to successfully cannulate the cecum due to technical difficulties;
- Patients with poor bowel preparation, i.e., patients with a total score of <6 or any bowel segment of <2 on the Boston Bowel Preparedness Scale score for poor bowel preparation).
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 |
|---|---|---|
| secondary colonoscopyAfter the routine colonoscopy, a repeat colonoscopy of the sigmoid colon is performed | Procedure or surgery | secondary colonoscopy group |
| conventional colonoscopyIt starts from the rectum and progresses forward to the cecum, with observations made during withdrawal: from the cecum, ascending colon, transverse colon, descending colon, and sigmoid colon to the rectum. | Procedure or surgery | conventional colonoscopy group |
Primary outcome
Detection rate of sigmoid colon adenoma
Time frame: 3 months
Number of patients with adenomas detected in the sigmoid colon in each group/number of patients examined in each group
1 secondary outcome
Detection rate of sigmoid colon polyps
Time frame: 3 months
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 10 Jun 2024.
- Background: PubMed 26818619Arnold M, Sierra MS, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global patterns and trends in colorectal cancer incidence and mortality. Gut. 2017 Apr;66(4):683-691. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2015-310912. Epub 2016 Jan 27.
- Background: PubMed 33657038Shaukat A, Kahi CJ, Burke CA, Rabeneck L, Sauer BG, Rex DK. ACG Clinical Guidelines: Colorectal Cancer Screening 2021. Am J Gastroenterol. 2021 Mar 1;116(3):458-479. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001122.
- Background: PubMed 30207593Bray F, Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Siegel RL, Torre LA, Jemal A. Global cancer statistics 2018: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2018 Nov;68(6):394-424. doi: 10.3322/caac.21492. Epub 2018 Sep 12.
- Background: PubMed 32192628Song M, Emilsson L, Bozorg SR, Nguyen LH, Joshi AD, Staller K, Nayor J, Chan AT, Ludvigsson JF. Risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after polypectomy: a Swedish record-linkage study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Jun;5(6):537-547. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(20)30009-1. Epub 2020 Mar 17.
- Background: PubMed 22356322Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O'Brien MJ, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Hankey BF, Shi W, Bond JH, Schapiro M, Panish JF, Stewart ET, Waye JD. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):687-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100370.
- Background: PubMed 30738046Zhao S, Wang S, Pan P, Xia T, Chang X, Yang X, Guo L, Meng Q, Yang F, Qian W, Xu Z, Wang Y, Wang Z, Gu L, Wang R, Jia F, Yao J, Li Z, Bai Y. Magnitude, Risk Factors, and Factors Associated With Adenoma Miss Rate of Tandem Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2019 May;156(6):1661-1674.e11. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.260. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
- Background: PubMed 19171141Martinez ME, Baron JA, Lieberman DA, Schatzkin A, Lanza E, Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Jiang R, Ahnen DJ, Bond JH, Church TR, Robertson DJ, Smith-Warner SA, Jacobs ET, Alberts DS, Greenberg ER. A pooled analysis of advanced colorectal neoplasia diagnoses after colonoscopic polypectomy. Gastroenterology. 2009 Mar;136(3):832-41. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2008.12.007. Epub 2008 Dec 9.
- Background: PubMed 21989586Cooper GS, Xu F, Barnholtz Sloan JS, Schluchter MD, Koroukian SM. Prevalence and predictors of interval colorectal cancers in medicare beneficiaries. Cancer. 2012 Jun 15;118(12):3044-52. doi: 10.1002/cncr.26602. Epub 2011 Oct 11.
- Background: PubMed 20463339Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, Polkowski M, Wojciechowska U, Didkowska J, Zwierko M, Rupinski M, Nowacki MP, Butruk E. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010 May 13;362(19):1795-803. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907667.
- Background: PubMed 24963577Corley DA, Levin TR, Doubeni CA. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014 Jun 26;370(26):2541. doi: 10.1056/NEJMc1405329. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 33922197Sawicki T, Ruszkowska M, Danielewicz A, Niedzwiedzka E, Arlukowicz T, Przybylowicz KE. A Review of Colorectal Cancer in Terms of Epidemiology, Risk Factors, Development, Symptoms and Diagnosis. Cancers (Basel). 2021 Apr 22;13(9):2025. doi: 10.3390/cancers13092025.
- Background: PubMed 32759620May FP, Shaukat A. State of the Science on Quality Indicators for Colonoscopy and How to Achieve Them. Am J Gastroenterol. 2020 Aug;115(8):1183-1190. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000000622.
Related trials for Colorectal Polyp
RecruitingObservational study
Malignant Polyp Registry
Malignant Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruiting
Social Software-Based Intelligent Management System for Bowel Preparation
Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Adenoma
Active, not recruiting
Feasibility and Colorectal Benefits of Pulses Supplementation
Colorectal Polyp, Obesity
RecruitingPhase 1
Testing for Safety and Colorectal Cancer Preventive Effects of ONC201
Colorectal Adenomatous Polyp, Colorectal Carcinoma
Recruiting
White Light, TXI, NBI and Computer-Aided Detection for Recurrence at Post-EMR Scars (PRINCESS)
Colorectal Polyps
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.
The record lists no contact. Use the official record to reach the sponsor.
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing secondary colonoscopy and conventional colonoscopy in people with Colorectal Polyp, run by Jianning Yao at 1 site in China.
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 2 inclusion and 4 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 10 Jun 2024. 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 China. 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?
Detection rate of sigmoid colon adenoma (time frame: 3 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 NCT06186778, which also lists 21 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 10 Jun 2024; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 1 Nov 2026.