Colo-rectal CancerNCT07445178
Piecemeal Resection and Advanced Histology Independently Predict Local Recurrence After Colorectal Snare-based Endoscopic Resection: a Time-to-event Cohort Study
An observational study of Colo-rectal Cancer, run by University of Sao Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
Trial summary
The objective of this retrospective cohort observational study is to identify variables related to the recurrence of colorectal lesions after snare polypectomy resection in colonoscopies. It also aims to evaluate the safety of the procedure. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Colo-rectal Cancer
- How many people
- 255 participants
- Where
- 1 siteBrazil
- Study dates
- 4 Dec 2025to 24 Feb 2026
- 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: The study population consisted of 255 consecutive adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent loop colorectal polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy, at a tertiary referral center between 2023 and 2025. Only individuals with available histopathological examination of the resected lesion and who had undergone at least one documented surveillance colonoscopy, allowing evaluation of the previous resection site, were included. Patients who underwent advanced non-loop-based techniques, those without endoscopic follow-up, and cases with incomplete clinical or histological data were excluded, ensuring methodological homogeneity and adequate measurement of outcomes.
Who may be able to join
- Age ≥ 18 years at the time of polypectomy;
- Underwent snare polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy (cold snare or hot snare), performed during the study period (2023-2025);
- Procedure performed at a participating tertiary center, ensuring technical and record standardization;
- Availability of histopathological examination of the resected lesion, allowing for adequate histological characterization;
- Performance of at least one documented surveillance colonoscopy, with evaluation of the previous resection site;
- Adequate recording of clinical and endoscopic variables necessary for analysis (lesion size, location, resection technique, etc.);
Who cannot join
- Patients undergoing techniques other than loop polypectomy, such as: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), advanced mucosal resection not based on conventional loop, primary surgical resection of the lesion;
- Absence of follow-up colonoscopy, making it impossible to assess the primary outcome (local recurrence);
- Incomplete clinical, endoscopic, or histopathological data that prevent adequate classification of study variables;
- Invasive lesions beyond the mucosa (invasive cancer with deep submucosal invasion) that have been referred for immediate surgical treatment without endoscopic follow-up;
- Loss to follow-up before the first surveillance colonoscopy.
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
Brazil1 site
Hospital das Clínicas of Ribeirão Preto Medical School
Ribeirão Preto, São Paulo, 14048-900
About this study
The objective of this retrospective cohort observational study is to identify variables related to the recurrence of colorectal lesions after snare polypectomy resection in colonoscopies. It also aims to evaluate the safety of the procedure. The main questions to be answered are:
- What endoscopic characteristics are most related to recurrence?
- What adverse events are related to the procedure?
The researchers will perform a chart analysis looking for demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histological variables in order to identify which factors are most closely linked to the recurrence of previously resected lesions.
Read the detailed description
- Scientific Basis Endoscopic resection represents one of the main strategies for preventing colorectal cancer, significantly reducing the incidence and mortality associated with the disease. Snare polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy (cold snare or hot snare), is widely used in clinical practice due to its efficacy, applicability, and favorable safety profile. However, despite the high initial success rate, local recurrence at the resection site remains a relevant clinical outcome, especially in larger lesions, piecemeal resections, and cases with advanced histological characteristics. The literature shows heterogeneity regarding independent predictors of recurrence, particularly when analyzed using time-to-event methodology. Given this scenario, it becomes essential to identify clinical, endoscopic, and histopathological variables associated with local recurrence, allowing for better risk stratification and optimization of surveillance protocols.
- Objectives Primary Objective: To identify variables associated with local recurrence after loop colorectal polypectomy. Secondary Objectives: To evaluate the occurrence of metachronous adenomas; To assess the safety of the procedure through the analysis of related adverse events; To determine independent predictors of recurrence using time-to-event analysis;
- Study Design Type: Retrospective observational cohort. Analytical model: Longitudinal study with time-to-event analysis. Center: Tertiary referral center. Inclusion period: 2023 to 2025. Sample: 255 consecutive adult patients. Essential criterion: Undergoing at least one surveillance colonoscopy after initial polypectomy.
- Study Population Inclusion Criteria: Patients ≥18 years; Underwent snare colorectal polypectomy (with or without thermal energy); Availability of histopathological examination; At least one documented follow-up colonoscopy; Exclusion Criteria: Resection by non-loop-based techniques (e.g., isolated ESD); Absence of endoscopic follow-up; Incomplete clinical or histological data;
- Characterization of the Lesions The lesions were described according to: Size: dichotomized into
- <10 mm;
- ≥10 mm; Location: right colon, transverse colon, left colon, or rectum. Morphological classification: according to the Paris Classification. Resection technique:
- En bloc;
- Piecemeal; Histopathology:
- Tubular adenoma;
- Tubulovillous adenoma;
- Villous adenoma;
- Serrated lesions;
- Intramucosal carcinoma; * Advanced histology: defined as the presence of high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma.
- Outcomes 6.1 Primary Outcome Local recurrence, defined as endoscopic identification and histological confirmation of neoplastic tissue at the site of previous resection during surveillance colonoscopy. 6.2 Secondary Outcomes Metachronous adenoma: development of a new lesion at a site distinct from the initial resection. Adverse events related to the procedure, including:
- Immediate bleeding;
- Delayed bleeding;
- Perforation;
- Post-polypectomy syndrome;
- Need for hospitalization;
- Need for surgical intervention;
- Data Collection The following variables were collected: 7.1 Clinical
- Age;
- Sex;
- Comorbidities;
- Indication for colonoscopy; 7.2 Endoscopic
- Lesion size;
- Location;
- Morphology;
- Resection technique (en bloc vs. piecemeal); 7.3 Histological
- Histological type;
- Degree of dysplasia;
- Presence of intramucosal carcinoma;
- Classification as advanced histology;
- Statistical Analysis
- The study was structured as a time-to-event analysis;
- Estimation of cumulative recurrence incidence;
- Kaplan-Meier curves for recurrence-free time analysis;
- Comparison between groups using the log-rank test;
- Cox regression models to identify independent predictors of recurrence;
- Hazard Ratio (HR) calculation with 95% CI;
- Significance level: p < 0.05;
- Relevant Methodological Aspects Consecutive inclusion to reduce selection bias. Standardization of endoscopic reports. Histopathological review according to institutional criteria. Objective definition of recurrence (histological confirmation).
- Expected Impact
This study will allow:
- Identification of independent factors associated with local recurrence;
- Better definition of the role of advanced histology as a risk marker;
- Improvement of post-polypectomy surveillance intervals;
- Consolidation of safety data in a real-world practice setting;
- Contribution to the individualization of endoscopic follow-up.
- Conditions
- Colo-rectal Cancer
- Keywords
- Colonoscopy, Snare polypectomy, Local recurrence, Advanced histology, Piecemeal resection, Time-to- event analysis
- Medical subject headings
- Colonic Neoplasms
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Local recurrence of the lesion at the site of the previous resection
Presence of a visible lesion at the scar site of a previous polypectomy, histologically confirmed as adenomatous, serrated, or neoplastic tissue, obtained by biopsy or new resection.
Measured: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
Secondary outcomes (2)
Presence of metachronous adenoma
Development of a new adenomatous or serrated lesion at a site different from the area of previous resection, identified during follow-up colonoscopy and confirmed histologically.
Measured: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
Adverse events related to the procedure
Complications attributable to snare polypectomy, classified as: immediate bleeding; delayed bleeding; perforation; post-polypectomy syndrome (when applicable); and need for hospitalization or surgical intervention.
Measured: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Mar 2026
- Study start4 Dec 2025
- Primary completion15 Jan 2026
- Study completion24 Feb 2026
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (27)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colo-rectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University of Sao PauloThe 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 255 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University of Sao Paulo
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Ricardo Ribeiro Correa Filho, University of Sao Paulo
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07445178
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 8.027.384
- Other IDs
- 94262925.8.0000.5440
- Status last verified
- Feb 2026
- First submitted
- 24 Feb 2026
- Last updated
- 3 Mar 2026
- Results posted
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- No: The individual patient data included in this study will not be shared with other researchers, as it contains sensitive clinical information obtained through medical record review and is protected by ethical and legal standards of confidentiality and data protection. Even after anonymization, sharing could represent a residual risk of re-identification, especially since it is a sample from a single center with specific clinical characteristics. Therefore, the restriction on external sharing aims to guarantee the privacy of participants, compliance with the guidelines of the Research Ethics Committee, and conformity with current data protection legislation.
Publications
Mohapatra S, Fukami N. Prevention of bleeding after EMR of colorectal lesions: when and how? Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Feb;7(2):109-110. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00463-5. No abstract available.
PubMed 35026166Albeniz E, Montori S, Rodriguez de Santiago E, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Alvarez MA, Estremera-Arevalo F, Pohl H. Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022 Jul 1;117(7):1080-1088. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001819. Epub 2022 May 4.
PubMed 35765907Mack A, Mangira D, Moss A. Prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding: Should we amend the 2017 ESGE Guideline? Endosc Int Open. 2020 Sep;8(9):E1111-E1114. doi: 10.1055/a-1196-1602. Epub 2020 Aug 31. No abstract available.
PubMed 32898199Burgess NG, Metz AJ, Williams SJ, Singh R, Tam W, Hourigan LF, Zanati SA, Brown GJ, Sonson R, Bourke MJ. Risk factors for intraprocedural and clinically significant delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Apr;12(4):651-61.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.09.049. Epub 2013 Oct 1.
PubMed 24090728Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF, Brown G, Tam W, Singh R, Zanati S, Chen RY, Byth K. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2011 Jun;140(7):1909-18. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.062. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
PubMed 21392504Facciorusso A, Di Maso M, Serviddio G, Vendemiale G, Spada C, Costamagna G, Muscatiello N. Factors Associated With Recurrence of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma After Endoscopic Resection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Aug;14(8):1148-1154.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.017. Epub 2016 Mar 19.
PubMed 27005802Andrisani G, Hassan C, Pizzicannella M, Pugliese F, Mutignani M, Campanale C, Valerii G, Barbera C, Antonelli G, Di Matteo FM. Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for challenging colorectal lesions: a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2023 Dec;98(6):987-997.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2023.06.009. Epub 2023 Jun 28.
PubMed 37390864Le QD, Le NQ, Quach DT. Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal neoplasms: A randomized controlled trial. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Jun 27;17(6):103635. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i6.103635.
PubMed 40584488Kaltenbach T, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Gupta S, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Endoscopic Removal of Colorectal Lesions-Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020 Mar;158(4):1095-1129. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.018. Epub 2020 Feb 11. No abstract available.
PubMed 32122632Ma MX, Bourke MJ. Sessile Serrated Adenomas: How to Detect, Characterize and Resect. Gut Liver. 2017 Nov 15;11(6):747-760. doi: 10.5009/gnl16523.
PubMed 28494577von Renteln D, Djinbachian R, Benard F, Barkun AN, Bouin M, Bouchard S, Deslandres E, Panzini B, Sidani S, Leduc R, Jobse BC, Pohl H. Incomplete resection of colorectal polyps of 4-20 mm in size when using a cold snare, and its associated factors. Endoscopy. 2023 Oct;55(10):929-937. doi: 10.1055/a-1978-3277. Epub 2022 Nov 14.
PubMed 36377124Kandel P, Hussain M, Yadav D, Dhungana SK, Brahmbhatt B, Raimondo M, Lukens FJ, Bachuwa G, Wallace MB. Post-EMR for colorectal polyps, thermal ablation of defects reduces adenoma recurrence: A meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2022 Oct 17;10(10):E1399-E1405. doi: 10.1055/a-1922-7646. eCollection 2022 Oct.
PubMed 36262518Makazu M, Sakamoto T, So E, Otake Y, Nakajima T, Matsuda T, Kushima R, Saito Y. Relationship between indeterminate or positive lateral margin and local recurrence after endoscopic resection of colorectal polyps. Endosc Int Open. 2015 Jun;3(3):E252-7. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1391853. Epub 2015 May 5.
PubMed 26171439Gupta S, Demb J, Qin J, Earles A, Lamm M, Doubeni CA, Martinez ME, Kaltenbach TR, Gawron AJ, Shah SC, Messer K, Liu L. Impact of Guideline-Concordant Post-Polypectomy Colonoscopy Surveillance on Colorectal Cancer Incidence and Mortality. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2026 Jun;24(6):1709-1719. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2025.11.012. Epub 2025 Nov 24.
PubMed 41297736Sadowski DC, Kolber MR, Gomes A, Hickle L, Hilsden R, McLean DR, Mok D, Moysey B, Nemecek N, Ryan JD, Sultanian R, Wiseman J, Yang H. Post-polypectomy surveillance: follow-up recommendations from the Alberta Colorectal Cancer Screening Program. J Can Assoc Gastroenterol. 2024 Mar 19;7(4):319-328. doi: 10.1093/jcag/gwae007. eCollection 2024 Aug.
PubMed 39139219
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 3 Mar 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Piecemeal Resection and Advanced Histology Independently Predict Local Recurrence After Colorectal Snare-based Endoscopic Resection: a Time-to-event Cohort Study
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT07445178
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 8.027.384
- Conditions
- Colo-rectal Cancer
- Keywords
- Colonoscopy, Snare polypectomy, Local recurrence, Advanced histology, Piecemeal resection, Time-to- event analysis
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 255 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University of Sao PauloUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 4 Dec 2025 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 15 Jan 2026 (actual)
- Study completion
- 24 Feb 2026 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Mar 2026 (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 objective of this retrospective cohort observational study is to identify variables related to the recurrence of colorectal lesions after snare polypectomy resection in colonoscopies. It also aims to evaluate the safety of the procedure. The main questions to be answered are:
- What endoscopic characteristics are most related to recurrence?
- What adverse events are related to the procedure?
The researchers will perform a chart analysis looking for demographic, clinical, endoscopic, and histological variables in order to identify which factors are most closely linked to the recurrence of previously resected lesions.
Detailed description
- Scientific Basis Endoscopic resection represents one of the main strategies for preventing colorectal cancer, significantly reducing the incidence and mortality associated with the disease. Snare polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy (cold snare or hot snare), is widely used in clinical practice due to its efficacy, applicability, and favorable safety profile. However, despite the high initial success rate, local recurrence at the resection site remains a relevant clinical outcome, especially in larger lesions, piecemeal resections, and cases with advanced histological characteristics. The literature shows heterogeneity regarding independent predictors of recurrence, particularly when analyzed using time-to-event methodology. Given this scenario, it becomes essential to identify clinical, endoscopic, and histopathological variables associated with local recurrence, allowing for better risk stratification and optimization of surveillance protocols.
- Objectives Primary Objective: To identify variables associated with local recurrence after loop colorectal polypectomy. Secondary Objectives: To evaluate the occurrence of metachronous adenomas; To assess the safety of the procedure through the analysis of related adverse events; To determine independent predictors of recurrence using time-to-event analysis;
- Study Design Type: Retrospective observational cohort. Analytical model: Longitudinal study with time-to-event analysis. Center: Tertiary referral center. Inclusion period: 2023 to 2025. Sample: 255 consecutive adult patients. Essential criterion: Undergoing at least one surveillance colonoscopy after initial polypectomy.
- Study Population Inclusion Criteria: Patients ≥18 years; Underwent snare colorectal polypectomy (with or without thermal energy); Availability of histopathological examination; At least one documented follow-up colonoscopy; Exclusion Criteria: Resection by non-loop-based techniques (e.g., isolated ESD); Absence of endoscopic follow-up; Incomplete clinical or histological data;
- Characterization of the Lesions The lesions were described according to: Size: dichotomized into
- <10 mm;
- ≥10 mm; Location: right colon, transverse colon, left colon, or rectum. Morphological classification: according to the Paris Classification. Resection technique:
- En bloc;
- Piecemeal; Histopathology:
- Tubular adenoma;
- Tubulovillous adenoma;
- Villous adenoma;
- Serrated lesions;
- Intramucosal carcinoma; * Advanced histology: defined as the presence of high-grade dysplasia and/or intramucosal adenocarcinoma.
- Outcomes 6.1 Primary Outcome Local recurrence, defined as endoscopic identification and histological confirmation of neoplastic tissue at the site of previous resection during surveillance colonoscopy. 6.2 Secondary Outcomes Metachronous adenoma: development of a new lesion at a site distinct from the initial resection. Adverse events related to the procedure, including:
- Immediate bleeding;
- Delayed bleeding;
- Perforation;
- Post-polypectomy syndrome;
- Need for hospitalization;
- Need for surgical intervention;
- Data Collection The following variables were collected: 7.1 Clinical
- Age;
- Sex;
- Comorbidities;
- Indication for colonoscopy; 7.2 Endoscopic
- Lesion size;
- Location;
- Morphology;
- Resection technique (en bloc vs. piecemeal); 7.3 Histological
- Histological type;
- Degree of dysplasia;
- Presence of intramucosal carcinoma;
- Classification as advanced histology;
- Statistical Analysis
- The study was structured as a time-to-event analysis;
- Estimation of cumulative recurrence incidence;
- Kaplan-Meier curves for recurrence-free time analysis;
- Comparison between groups using the log-rank test;
- Cox regression models to identify independent predictors of recurrence;
- Hazard Ratio (HR) calculation with 95% CI;
- Significance level: p < 0.05;
- Relevant Methodological Aspects Consecutive inclusion to reduce selection bias. Standardization of endoscopic reports. Histopathological review according to institutional criteria. Objective definition of recurrence (histological confirmation).
- Expected Impact
This study will allow:
- Identification of independent factors associated with local recurrence;
- Better definition of the role of advanced histology as a risk marker;
- Improvement of post-polypectomy surveillance intervals;
- Consolidation of safety data in a real-world practice setting;
- Contribution to the individualization of endoscopic follow-up.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- The study population consisted of 255 consecutive adult patients (≥18 years) who underwent loop colorectal polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy, at a tertiary referral center between 2023 and 2025. Only individuals with available histopathological examination of the resected lesion and who had undergone at least one documented surveillance colonoscopy, allowing evaluation of the previous resection site, were included. Patients who underwent advanced non-loop-based techniques, those without endoscopic follow-up, and cases with incomplete clinical or histological data were excluded, ensuring methodological homogeneity and adequate measurement of outcomes.
Key inclusion criteria (6 listed)
- Age ≥ 18 years at the time of polypectomy;
- Underwent snare polypectomy, with or without the use of thermal energy (cold snare or hot snare), performed during the study period (2023-2025);
- Procedure performed at a participating tertiary center, ensuring technical and record standardization;
- Availability of histopathological examination of the resected lesion, allowing for adequate histological characterization;
- Performance of at least one documented surveillance colonoscopy, with evaluation of the previous resection site;
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patients undergoing techniques other than loop polypectomy, such as: Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD), advanced mucosal resection not based on conventional loop, primary surgical resection of the lesion;
- Absence of follow-up colonoscopy, making it impossible to assess the primary outcome (local recurrence);
- Incomplete clinical, endoscopic, or histopathological data that prevent adequate classification of study variables;
- Invasive lesions beyond the mucosa (invasive cancer with deep submucosal invasion) that have been referred for immediate surgical treatment without endoscopic follow-up;
- Loss to follow-up before the first surveillance colonoscopy.
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Primary outcome
Local recurrence of the lesion at the site of the previous resection
Time frame: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
Presence of a visible lesion at the scar site of a previous polypectomy, histologically confirmed as adenomatous, serrated, or neoplastic tissue, obtained by biopsy or new resection.
2 secondary outcomes
Presence of metachronous adenoma
Time frame: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
Adverse events related to the procedure
Time frame: Between the years 2023 and 2025.
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 3 Mar 2026.
- Results publication: PubMed 35026166Mohapatra S, Fukami N. Prevention of bleeding after EMR of colorectal lesions: when and how? Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2022 Feb;7(2):109-110. doi: 10.1016/S2468-1253(21)00463-5. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 35765907Albeniz E, Montori S, Rodriguez de Santiago E, Lorenzo-Zuniga V, Alvarez MA, Estremera-Arevalo F, Pohl H. Preventing Postendoscopic Mucosal Resection Bleeding of Large Nonpedunculated Colorectal Lesions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2022 Jul 1;117(7):1080-1088. doi: 10.14309/ajg.0000000000001819. Epub 2022 May 4.
- Results publication: PubMed 32898199Mack A, Mangira D, Moss A. Prevention of delayed post-polypectomy bleeding: Should we amend the 2017 ESGE Guideline? Endosc Int Open. 2020 Sep;8(9):E1111-E1114. doi: 10.1055/a-1196-1602. Epub 2020 Aug 31. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 24090728Burgess NG, Metz AJ, Williams SJ, Singh R, Tam W, Hourigan LF, Zanati SA, Brown GJ, Sonson R, Bourke MJ. Risk factors for intraprocedural and clinically significant delayed bleeding after wide-field endoscopic mucosal resection of large colonic lesions. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2014 Apr;12(4):651-61.e1-3. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2013.09.049. Epub 2013 Oct 1.
- Results publication: PubMed 21392504Moss A, Bourke MJ, Williams SJ, Hourigan LF, Brown G, Tam W, Singh R, Zanati S, Chen RY, Byth K. Endoscopic mucosal resection outcomes and prediction of submucosal cancer from advanced colonic mucosal neoplasia. Gastroenterology. 2011 Jun;140(7):1909-18. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2011.02.062. Epub 2011 Mar 8.
- Results publication: PubMed 27005802Facciorusso A, Di Maso M, Serviddio G, Vendemiale G, Spada C, Costamagna G, Muscatiello N. Factors Associated With Recurrence of Advanced Colorectal Adenoma After Endoscopic Resection. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2016 Aug;14(8):1148-1154.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.cgh.2016.03.017. Epub 2016 Mar 19.
- Results publication: PubMed 37390864Andrisani G, Hassan C, Pizzicannella M, Pugliese F, Mutignani M, Campanale C, Valerii G, Barbera C, Antonelli G, Di Matteo FM. Endoscopic full-thickness resection versus endoscopic submucosal dissection for challenging colorectal lesions: a randomized trial. Gastrointest Endosc. 2023 Dec;98(6):987-997.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2023.06.009. Epub 2023 Jun 28.
- Results publication: PubMed 40584488Le QD, Le NQ, Quach DT. Underwater vs conventional endoscopic mucosal resection for nonpedunculated colorectal neoplasms: A randomized controlled trial. World J Gastrointest Surg. 2025 Jun 27;17(6):103635. doi: 10.4240/wjgs.v17.i6.103635.
- Results publication: PubMed 32122632Kaltenbach T, Anderson JC, Burke CA, Dominitz JA, Gupta S, Lieberman D, Robertson DJ, Shaukat A, Syngal S, Rex DK. Endoscopic Removal of Colorectal Lesions-Recommendations by the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer. Gastroenterology. 2020 Mar;158(4):1095-1129. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.12.018. Epub 2020 Feb 11. No abstract available.
- Results publication: PubMed 28494577Ma MX, Bourke MJ. Sessile Serrated Adenomas: How to Detect, Characterize and Resect. Gut Liver. 2017 Nov 15;11(6):747-760. doi: 10.5009/gnl16523.
- Results publication: PubMed 36377124von Renteln D, Djinbachian R, Benard F, Barkun AN, Bouin M, Bouchard S, Deslandres E, Panzini B, Sidani S, Leduc R, Jobse BC, Pohl H. Incomplete resection of colorectal polyps of 4-20 mm in size when using a cold snare, and its associated factors. Endoscopy. 2023 Oct;55(10):929-937. doi: 10.1055/a-1978-3277. Epub 2022 Nov 14.
- Results publication: PubMed 36262518Kandel P, Hussain M, Yadav D, Dhungana SK, Brahmbhatt B, Raimondo M, Lukens FJ, Bachuwa G, Wallace MB. Post-EMR for colorectal polyps, thermal ablation of defects reduces adenoma recurrence: A meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open. 2022 Oct 17;10(10):E1399-E1405. doi: 10.1055/a-1922-7646. eCollection 2022 Oct.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No. The individual patient data included in this study will not be shared with other researchers, as it contains sensitive clinical information obtained through medical record review and is protected by ethical and legal standards of confidentiality and data protection. Even after anonymization, sharing could represent a residual risk of re-identification, especially since it is a sample from a single center with specific clinical characteristics. Therefore, the restriction on external sharing aims to guarantee the privacy of participants, compliance with the guidelines of the Research Ethics Committee, and conformity with current data protection legislation.
Related trials for Colo-rectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 1
Hepatic Artery Infusion of Carfilzomib in Participants With Liver Metastatic Disease Previously Treated With Hepatic Artery Infusion Pump Therapy
Colorectal Neoplasms, Neoplasms
Active, not recruiting
Streamlined Geriatric and Oncological Evaluation Based On IC Technology
Breast Cancer, Comorbidities and Coexisting Conditions
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Natural History Study of Early Life Exposures in Agriculture (ELEA)
Prostate Cancer, Leukemia
RecruitingPhase 2
Tislelizumab in People With Colorectal Cancer
Colorectal Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Alberta Cancer Exercise Dose in Colorectal Cancer
Cancer, Colorectal 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.
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?
An observational study of Colo-rectal Cancer, run by University of Sao Paulo at 1 site in Brazil.
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 6 inclusion and 5 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 3 Mar 2026. 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 Brazil. 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?
Local recurrence of the lesion at the site of the previous resection (time frame: Between the years 2023 and 2025.). 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 NCT07445178, which also lists 27 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 3 Mar 2026.