Hypertrophic CardiomyopathyPhase 3ATP-HCMNCT06873828
Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Wearable ECG (AT-Patch) in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Requiring 48-Hour Holter MonitoringEvaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Wearable ECG (AT-Patch) in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Requiring 48-Hour Holter Monitoring
A Phase 3 study testing ATP-C135 and ATP-C75 in people with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, run by Yonsei University.
Trial summary
Validation of validity, superiority, and safety of data analysis results using AT-Patch compared to 48-hour Holter test results Number of subjects: 100 (including 10% dropout rate) Performance and safety were verified by simultaneously attaching a 48-hour Holter and a wearable Holter device (ATP-C75 or ATP-C135). Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 19 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
- What is being tested?
- ATP-C135 and ATP-C75
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- How many people
- 100 participants
- Where
- No sites listed yet
- Study dates
- Mar 2025to Oct 2025
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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 19 years and older
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Male and female subjects aged 19 years or older
- Subjects diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who require 48-hour Holter examination
Who cannot join
- Those judged by the investigator to be unsuitable for this clinical trial or those who may increase the risk due to participation in the clinical trial
- Those with sensitive or allergic skin, skin diseases such as skin cancer or rashes
- Those with pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, or other implantable electrical devices
- Pregnant women
Trial locations and contacts
No sites are listed yet. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Wearable ECG (AT-Patch) in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Requiring 48-Hour Holter Monitoring : A Prospective Superiority Study
- Validation of validity, superiority, and safety of data analysis results using AT-Patch compared to 48-hour Holter test results
- Number of subjects: 100 (including 10% dropout rate)
- Performance and safety were verified by simultaneously attaching a 48-hour Holter and a wearable Holter device (ATP-C75 or ATP-C135).
Read the detailed description
Prospective, sequential, superiority test Patients diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who require 48-hour Holter monitoring.
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/total time comparison)
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/total time comparison)
- Comparison between IDs
- Conditions
- Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
- Being tested
- ATP-C135, ATP-C75
- Medical subject headings
- Cardiomyopathy, Hypertrophic
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
ATP-C135Device
A wearable long-term electrocardiogram monitoring device that monitors electrocardiograms by attaching it for up to 14 days.
ATP-C75Device
A wearable long-term electrocardiogram monitoring device that monitors electrocardiograms by attaching it for up to 7 days.
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Comparison of arrhythmia detection rates between the test group and the control group after using a medical device for clinical trials
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days)
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/14days)
Measured: ATP-C75 : 7day , ATP-C135 : 14day
Secondary outcomes (5)
Arrhythmia detection rate by test time in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Comparison of control and test period (48hrs vs total time) Comparison by disease type Comparison of test period ATP-C135 : 14day / No f/u
■ Safety Issue ATP-C75 : 7day ATP-C135 : 14day
Measured: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/ 14days)
Comparison of the concordance rate of the analysis results of the simultaneous attachment time in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Comparison of control and test period (48hrs vs total time) Comparison by disease type Comparison of test period ATP-C135 : 14day / No f/u
■ Safety Issue ATP-C75 : 7day ATP-C135 : 14day
Measured: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison)
User response evaluation (satisfaction) in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Comparison of control and test period (48hrs vs total time) Comparison by disease type Comparison of test period ATP-C135 : 14day / No f/u
■ Safety Issue ATP-C75 : 7day ATP-C135 : 14day
Measured: ■48-hour Holter : 48hrs ■ATP-C75 : 7days ■ATP-C135 : 14days
Arrhythmia detection rate in the test group and control group by hypertrophic cardiomyopathy subtype (Apical HCM, Non-apical HCM)
Comparison of control and test period (48hrs vs total time) Comparison by disease type Comparison of test period ATP-C135 : 14day / No f/u
■ Safety Issue ATP-C75 : 7day ATP-C135 : 14day
Measured: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/ 14days)
Arrhythmia detection rate by test group (ATP-C75, ATP-C135)
Comparison of control and test period (48hrs vs total time) Comparison by disease type Comparison of test period
Measured: ■ATP-C75 vs ATP-C135 ( 7days vs 14days )
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted13 Mar 2025
- Study startMar 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completionOct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completionOct 2025 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (3)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Hypertrophic CardiomyopathyStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Yonsei UniversityThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Interventional
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Yonsei University
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06873828
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2024-3479-001
- Acronym
- ATP-HCM
- Status last verified
- Mar 2025
- First submitted
- 26 Feb 2025
- Last updated
- 13 Mar 2025
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The individual data of the subjects will be pseudonymized/anonymized in accordance with ICH GCP and recorded in the case record sheet, and only the participating researchers will be able to access the data. Monitoring will be conducted by a monitor designated by the client to conduct SDV, and the CRF for which SDV has been completed will be collected at the end of the study with the signature of the PI.
Publications
Rowin EJ, Das G, Madias C, Hsu M, Crosson L, Turakhia MP, Maron BJ, Maron MS. Extended ambulatory ECG monitoring enhances identification of higher-risk ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm. 2025 Jul;22(7):1696-1704. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.09.040. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
PubMed 39307380Weissler-Snir A, Chan RH, Adler A, Care M, Chauhan V, Gollob MH, Ziv-Baran T, Fourey D, Hindieh W, Rakowski H, Spears DA. Usefulness of 14-Day Holter for Detection of Nonsustained Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 2016 Oct 15;118(8):1258-1263. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.07.043. Epub 2016 Jul 29.
PubMed 27567133Bansal A, Joshi R. Portable out-of-hospital electrocardiography: A review of current technologies. J Arrhythm. 2018 Feb 23;34(2):129-138. doi: 10.1002/joa3.12035. eCollection 2018 Apr.
PubMed 29657588
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 13 Mar 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of the Efficacy and Safety of Wearable ECG (AT-Patch) in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy Requiring 48-Hour Holter Monitoring : A Prospective Superiority Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT06873828
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- ATP-HCM / 2024-3479-001
- Conditions
- Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
- Phase
- Phase 3
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Not yet recruiting
- Enrolment
- 100 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Yonsei UniversityUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Mar 2025 (estimated)
- Primary completion
- Oct 2025 (estimated)
- Study completion
- Oct 2025 (estimated)
- First posted
- 13 Mar 2025 (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.
- Validation of validity, superiority, and safety of data analysis results using AT-Patch compared to 48-hour Holter test results
- Number of subjects: 100 (including 10% dropout rate)
- Performance and safety were verified by simultaneously attaching a 48-hour Holter and a wearable Holter device (ATP-C75 or ATP-C135).
Detailed description
Prospective, sequential, superiority test Patients diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who require 48-hour Holter monitoring.
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/total time comparison)
- 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/total time comparison)
- Comparison between IDs
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Non-randomised
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 19 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Male and female subjects aged 19 years or older
- Subjects diagnosed with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy who require 48-hour Holter examination
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Those judged by the investigator to be unsuitable for this clinical trial or those who may increase the risk due to participation in the clinical trial
- Those with sensitive or allergic skin, skin diseases such as skin cancer or rashes
- Those with pacemakers, implantable cardioverter-defibrillators, or other implantable electrical devices
- Pregnant women
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 |
|---|---|---|
| ATP-C135A wearable long-term electrocardiogram monitoring device that monitors electrocardiograms by attaching it for up to 14 days. | Device | – |
| ATP-C75A wearable long-term electrocardiogram monitoring device that monitors electrocardiograms by attaching it for up to 7 days. | Device | – |
Primary outcome
Comparison of arrhythmia detection rates between the test group and the control group after using a medical device for clinical trials
Time frame: ATP-C75 : 7day , ATP-C135 : 14day
* 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days) * 48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/14days)
5 secondary outcomes
Arrhythmia detection rate by test time in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Time frame: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/ 14days)
Comparison of the concordance rate of the analysis results of the simultaneous attachment time in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Time frame: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison)
User response evaluation (satisfaction) in the test group and control group after using the clinical trial medical device
Time frame: ■48-hour Holter : 48hrs ■ATP-C75 : 7days ■ATP-C135 : 14days
Arrhythmia detection rate in the test group and control group by hypertrophic cardiomyopathy subtype (Apical HCM, Non-apical HCM)
Time frame: ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C75 (48-hour comparison/7days) ■48-hour Holter vs ATP-C135 (48-hour comparison/ 14days)
Arrhythmia detection rate by test group (ATP-C75, ATP-C135)
Time frame: ■ATP-C75 vs ATP-C135 ( 7days vs 14days )
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 13 Mar 2025.
- Background: PubMed 39307380Rowin EJ, Das G, Madias C, Hsu M, Crosson L, Turakhia MP, Maron BJ, Maron MS. Extended ambulatory ECG monitoring enhances identification of higher-risk ventricular tachyarrhythmias in patients with hypertrophic cardiomyopathy. Heart Rhythm. 2025 Jul;22(7):1696-1704. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.09.040. Epub 2024 Sep 20.
- Background: PubMed 27567133Weissler-Snir A, Chan RH, Adler A, Care M, Chauhan V, Gollob MH, Ziv-Baran T, Fourey D, Hindieh W, Rakowski H, Spears DA. Usefulness of 14-Day Holter for Detection of Nonsustained Ventricular Tachycardia in Patients With Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy. Am J Cardiol. 2016 Oct 15;118(8):1258-1263. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2016.07.043. Epub 2016 Jul 29.
- Background: PubMed 29657588Bansal A, Joshi R. Portable out-of-hospital electrocardiography: A review of current technologies. J Arrhythm. 2018 Feb 23;34(2):129-138. doi: 10.1002/joa3.12035. eCollection 2018 Apr.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The individual data of the subjects will be pseudonymized/anonymized in accordance with ICH GCP and recorded in the case record sheet, and only the participating researchers will be able to access the data. Monitoring will be conducted by a monitor designated by the client to conduct SDV, and the CRF for which SDV has been completed will be collected at the end of the study with the signature of the PI.
Related trials for Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Not yet recruiting
Human Experimental Models of Pain (HEMP)
Acute Pain
Not yet recruiting
NHLBI SESAME (SEptal Scoring Along Midline Endocardium) Multi-Center Prospective Study Using Improvised Off-Label Devices
Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, Left Ventricular Outflow Obstruction
RecruitingPhase 1
Study to Assess the Safety, Tolerability, Pharmacokinetics, and Pharmacodynamics of HTX-001
Nonobstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Recruiting
Positron Emission Tomography to Assess the Effect of Camzyos on Ischaemia in HOCM: PEACH Trial
Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy \(HOCM\), Left Ventricular Outflow Tract Obstruction
RecruitingObservational study
A 10-Minute Cardiovascular Magnetic Resonance Protocol for Cardiac Disease
Coronary Artery Disease, Myocarditis
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.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A Phase 3 study testing ATP-C135 and ATP-C75 in people with Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy, run by Yonsei University.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 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: opening soon, as of the sponsor's last update on 13 Mar 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
What does this phase mean?
Phase 3 studies compare the treatment with the current standard treatment or a placebo in a large group, to confirm how well it works and watch for side effects.
Not every study follows the same path, and some studies (observational studies, device studies) have no phase.
Are results available for this study?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Ik-Seong Cho, MD,PhD (82-10-8975-2413, IKSUNGCHO@yuhs.ac), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Comparison of arrhythmia detection rates between the test group and the control group after using a medical device for clinical trials (time frame: ATP-C75 : 7day , ATP-C135 : 14day). 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 NCT06873828, which also lists 3 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 13 Mar 2025.