Colorectal CancerNCT00991003
A New Method for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Colon Capsule Endoscopy Compared to Conventional Endoscopy
A study testing Colon capsule endoscopy and Conventional Colonoscopy in people with Colorectal Cancer, run by University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland at 1 site in Switzerland.
Trial summary
Introduction: Prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is feasible through polypectomy on screening colonoscopy. Patient acceptance remains the main limiting factor for execution. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be a novel method for large populations. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 85 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Colorectal Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Colon capsule endoscopy and Conventional Colonoscopy
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Surgery or procedure
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 59 participants
- Where
- 1 siteSwitzerland
- Study dates
- Nov 2007to May 2008
- 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 18 to 85 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- male/female above the age of 50 years with symptoms (Indication for screening)
- male/female above the age of 50 years without symptoms
- male/female younger than 50 years without symptoms but with a positive family history for colorectal cancer (CRC) (Indication for screening)
Who cannot join
- CRC in the patient's history
- cardiac pacemaker
- contraindications for sodium phosphate solution (Colophos®)
- risk factors for capsule retention including surgical intestinal anastomosis, Crohn's disease, diverticulitis and radiologically suspected bowel obstruction
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Introduction:
Prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is feasible through polypectomy on screening colonoscopy. Patient acceptance remains the main limiting factor for execution. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be a novel method for large populations.
Aims and methods:
Patients referred for screening means or lower gastrointestinal complaints were included in this single center pilot study. They underwent preparation and then ingested the capsule (PillCam Colon). Standard colonoscopy was performed the next morning. Significance was defined as polyps >5mm in size. Performance of exams was by independent physician with blinding of results.
Read the detailed description
Study design This was a prospective, single center pilot analysis under screening conditions. Patient enrollment was from November 5, 2007, to May 7, 2008. All patients provided written informed consent. Patients underwent CCE on day 1 and conventional colonoscopy on day 2, the examinations were done by different physicians. Results were blinded until both examinations had been completed and until interobserver evaluation was finished. Patient acceptance was assessed with a questionnaire after completion of both examinations.
This study was approved by the ethics committee. The study was partly funded by the Nycomed Fund of the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland and by Given Imaging Ltd., Yoqneam, Israel).
The authors designed the study, gathered and analyzed the data; the sponsors had no role in design or conduct of the study nor did they review or approve the data.
Patients Men and women above the age of 50 years without symptoms (Indication for screening) or with lower gastrointestinal signs and symptoms and individuals younger than 50 years, minimum 18 years, without symptoms but with a positive family history for colorectal cancer (CRC) (Indication for screening) were considered for this study. Exclusion criteria were CRC in the patient's history, cardiac pacemaker, contraindications for sodium phosphate solution (Colophos®) and risk factors for capsule retention including surgical intestinal anastomosis, Crohn's disease, diverticulitis and radiologically suspected bowel obstruction.
Data collection General characteristic of the patients were assembled, including demographics, family history and recent surgery, as well as bowel habits.
Hypothesis, Aim and End Points Significance was defined as polyps >5mm in size, with the hypothesis that detection rate on CCE corresponds with colonoscopy. The aim was to evaluate a novel method (colon capsule endoscopy) for performance as a screening tool compared to conventional colonoscopy in asymptomatic patients. The proclaimed benefit would be an increase in acceptance of screening for colorectal cancer and a probable better detection rate of adenoma resp. carcinoma.
The primary endpoint was the number of cancerous lesions and polyps detected on CCE compared to conventional colonoscopy. Secondary endpoints were completeness of the exam completeness, patient acceptance and adherence to preparation regimen.
Colon preparation and Propulsion of the Capsule For colon cleansing we applied our department's standard preparation procedure for conventional colonoscopy including diet and Macrogolum (PEG, Cololyt®; Spirig Pharma, Egerkingen, Switzerland) and added an oral motility agent, Phospho Soda (Colophos®; Spirig Pharma, Egerkingen, Switzerland)-boosters and a rectal suppository that promotes defecation, Table 1. Patients started with a low residual diet three days prior to the PillCam® Colon examination. The following day they were required to adhere to a liquid diet and one day before the examination to a clear liquid diet. The evening before the examination they ingested 2 litres of Cololyt® between 18:00 and 19:30 and continued with another 2 litres the next morning between 7:00 and 8:30. At 11:00 they were given 2 tablets of Domperidon (Motilium®; Janssen-Cilag AG, Baar, Switzerland) 10mg a couple of minutes prior to the PillCam® Colon capsule. Propulsion from stomach to small bowel was verified using real time viewing before giving the first Colophos® booster (45 ml). That we later abandoned (for the remaining 49 patients) due to satisfactory propulsion. If the capsule had not been excreted by 17:00 (3 hours after the first dose) a second dose of 30 ml Colophos® was added. If it still had not been excreted by 19:30, a suppository of Bisacodylum 10 mg (Prontolax®; Streuli Pharma, Uznach, Switzerland) was administered. The patient removed electrodes and recorder-belt at the excretion of the capsule or at 22:00, which ever came first, and continued clear liquid diet until the conventional colonoscopy was performed the following day.
Pillcam Colon Capsule The PillCam® Colon Capsule is 11mm x 31mm in size (Figure 1). It is equipped with two cameras acquiring pictures from both ends of the capsule at a rate of 4 frames per second (2 pictures per second and camera). Compared to the PillCam® Small Bowel capsule the optic is optimized and more than double of the area coverage and depth view are provided. The PillCam® Colon Capsule is automatically activated when it is removed from the package. It enters sleeping mode in order to save energy after approximately 10 minutes and starts transmitting again 1 h 45 min later. It has a total operating time of 8 - 10 hours. During the examination the patient wears a sensor array which is attached to the abdominal skin and a data recorder for storage of the information generated by the ingested capsule. After the examination the data are downloaded into the Given Imaging workstation and a video is generated.
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer
- Being tested
- Colon capsule endoscopy, Conventional Colonoscopy
- Keywords
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy, Colorectal Cancer, Colonoscopy
- Medical subject headings
- Colorectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Colon capsule endoscopyProcedure or surgery
Also called Pillcam Colon Capsule
The PillCam® Colon Capsule is 11mm x 31mm in size (Figure 1), is equipped with two cameras acquiring pictures from both ends of the capsule at a rate of 4 frames per second (2 pictures per second and camera). The PillCam® Colon Capsule is automatically activated when it is removed from the package. It enters sleeping mode after approximately 10 minutes and starts transmitting again 1 h 45 min later. It has a total operating time of 8 - 10 hours. During the examination the patient wears a sensor array which is attached to the abdominal skin and a data recorder for storage of the information generated by the ingested capsule. After the examination the data are downloaded into the Given Imaging workstation and a video is generated.
Conventional ColonoscopyProcedure or surgery
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy | Experimental | Patients underwent CCE on day 1 and conventional colonoscopy on day 2 Receives: Procedure: Colon capsule endoscopy; Procedure: Conventional Colonoscopy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
The primary endpoint was the number of cancerous lesions and polyps detected on CCE compared to conventional colonoscopy
Measured: 7 Months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Secondary endpoints were completeness of the exam completeness, patient acceptance and adherence to preparation regimen
Measured: 7 Months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted7 Oct 2009 (estimated)
- Study startNov 2007
- Primary completionMay 2008
- Study completionMay 2008
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Colorectal CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandThe 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 N/A
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind
- Who is masked
- Investigator
- Enrolment
- 59 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Investigators
- Julia B Pilz, MD, Principal investigator, University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandChristoph Beglinger, MD, Study director, University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandLukas Degen, MD, Study chair, University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00991003
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- EKBB25407
- Status last verified
- Oct 2009
- First submitted
- 6 Oct 2009
- Last updated
- 7 Oct 2009
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Pilz JB, Portmann S, Peter S, Beglinger C, Degen L. Colon Capsule Endoscopy compared to Conventional Colonoscopy under routine screening conditions. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010 Jun 18;10:66. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-10-66.
PubMed 20565828
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Oct 2009. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A New Method for Colorectal Cancer Screening: Colon Capsule Endoscopy Compared to Conventional Endoscopy
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT00991003
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- EKBB25407
- Conditions
- Colorectal Cancer
- Keywords
- Colon Capsule Endoscopy, Colorectal Cancer, Colonoscopy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 59 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- University Hospital, Basel, SwitzerlandUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Nov 2007
- Primary completion
- May 2008 (actual)
- Study completion
- May 2008 (actual)
- First posted
- 7 Oct 2009 (estimated)
- 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.
Introduction:
Prevention of colorectal cancer (CRC) is feasible through polypectomy on screening colonoscopy. Patient acceptance remains the main limiting factor for execution. Colon capsule endoscopy (CCE) might be a novel method for large populations.
Aims and methods:
Patients referred for screening means or lower gastrointestinal complaints were included in this single center pilot study. They underwent preparation and then ingested the capsule (PillCam Colon). Standard colonoscopy was performed the next morning. Significance was defined as polyps >5mm in size. Performance of exams was by independent physician with blinding of results.
Detailed description
Study design This was a prospective, single center pilot analysis under screening conditions. Patient enrollment was from November 5, 2007, to May 7, 2008. All patients provided written informed consent. Patients underwent CCE on day 1 and conventional colonoscopy on day 2, the examinations were done by different physicians. Results were blinded until both examinations had been completed and until interobserver evaluation was finished. Patient acceptance was assessed with a questionnaire after completion of both examinations.
This study was approved by the ethics committee. The study was partly funded by the Nycomed Fund of the University Hospital Basel, Switzerland and by Given Imaging Ltd., Yoqneam, Israel).
The authors designed the study, gathered and analyzed the data; the sponsors had no role in design or conduct of the study nor did they review or approve the data.
Patients Men and women above the age of 50 years without symptoms (Indication for screening) or with lower gastrointestinal signs and symptoms and individuals younger than 50 years, minimum 18 years, without symptoms but with a positive family history for colorectal cancer (CRC) (Indication for screening) were considered for this study. Exclusion criteria were CRC in the patient's history, cardiac pacemaker, contraindications for sodium phosphate solution (Colophos®) and risk factors for capsule retention including surgical intestinal anastomosis, Crohn's disease, diverticulitis and radiologically suspected bowel obstruction.
Data collection General characteristic of the patients were assembled, including demographics, family history and recent surgery, as well as bowel habits.
Hypothesis, Aim and End Points Significance was defined as polyps >5mm in size, with the hypothesis that detection rate on CCE corresponds with colonoscopy. The aim was to evaluate a novel method (colon capsule endoscopy) for performance as a screening tool compared to conventional colonoscopy in asymptomatic patients. The proclaimed benefit would be an increase in acceptance of screening for colorectal cancer and a probable better detection rate of adenoma resp. carcinoma.
The primary endpoint was the number of cancerous lesions and polyps detected on CCE compared to conventional colonoscopy. Secondary endpoints were completeness of the exam completeness, patient acceptance and adherence to preparation regimen.
Colon preparation and Propulsion of the Capsule For colon cleansing we applied our department's standard preparation procedure for conventional colonoscopy including diet and Macrogolum (PEG, Cololyt®; Spirig Pharma, Egerkingen, Switzerland) and added an oral motility agent, Phospho Soda (Colophos®; Spirig Pharma, Egerkingen, Switzerland)-boosters and a rectal suppository that promotes defecation, Table 1. Patients started with a low residual diet three days prior to the PillCam® Colon examination. The following day they were required to adhere to a liquid diet and one day before the examination to a clear liquid diet. The evening before the examination they ingested 2 litres of Cololyt® between 18:00 and 19:30 and continued with another 2 litres the next morning between 7:00 and 8:30. At 11:00 they were given 2 tablets of Domperidon (Motilium®; Janssen-Cilag AG, Baar, Switzerland) 10mg a couple of minutes prior to the PillCam® Colon capsule. Propulsion from stomach to small bowel was verified using real time viewing before giving the first Colophos® booster (45 ml). That we later abandoned (for the remaining 49 patients) due to satisfactory propulsion. If the capsule had not been excreted by 17:00 (3 hours after the first dose) a second dose of 30 ml Colophos® was added. If it still had not been excreted by 19:30, a suppository of Bisacodylum 10 mg (Prontolax®; Streuli Pharma, Uznach, Switzerland) was administered. The patient removed electrodes and recorder-belt at the excretion of the capsule or at 22:00, which ever came first, and continued clear liquid diet until the conventional colonoscopy was performed the following day.
Pillcam Colon Capsule The PillCam® Colon Capsule is 11mm x 31mm in size (Figure 1). It is equipped with two cameras acquiring pictures from both ends of the capsule at a rate of 4 frames per second (2 pictures per second and camera). Compared to the PillCam® Small Bowel capsule the optic is optimized and more than double of the area coverage and depth view are provided. The PillCam® Colon Capsule is automatically activated when it is removed from the package. It enters sleeping mode in order to save energy after approximately 10 minutes and starts transmitting again 1 h 45 min later. It has a total operating time of 8 - 10 hours. During the examination the patient wears a sensor array which is attached to the abdominal skin and a data recorder for storage of the information generated by the ingested capsule. After the examination the data are downloaded into the Given Imaging workstation and a video is generated.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Prevention
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- Single blind (investigator)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy | Experimental | Procedure: Colon capsule endoscopy, Procedure: Conventional ColonoscopyPatients underwent CCE on day 1 and conventional colonoscopy on day 2 |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 85 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- male/female above the age of 50 years with symptoms (Indication for screening)
- male/female above the age of 50 years without symptoms
- male/female younger than 50 years without symptoms but with a positive family history for colorectal cancer (CRC) (Indication for screening)
Key exclusion criteria (4 listed)
- CRC in the patient's history
- cardiac pacemaker
- contraindications for sodium phosphate solution (Colophos®)
- risk factors for capsule retention including surgical intestinal anastomosis, Crohn's disease, diverticulitis and radiologically suspected bowel obstruction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Colon capsule endoscopyAlso: Pillcam Colon CapsuleThe PillCam® Colon Capsule is 11mm x 31mm in size (Figure 1), is equipped with two cameras acquiring pictures from both ends of the capsule at a rate of 4 frames per second (2 pictures per second and camera). The PillCam® Colon Capsule is automatically activated when it is removed from the package. It enters sleeping mode after approximately 10 minutes and starts transmitting again 1 h 45 min later. It has a total operating time of 8 - 10 hours. During the examination the patient wears a sensor array which is attached to the abdominal skin and a data recorder for storage of the information generated by the ingested capsule. After the examination the data are downloaded into the Given Imaging workstation and a video is generated. | Procedure or surgery | Colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy |
| Conventional Colonoscopy | Procedure or surgery | Colon capsule endoscopy and colonoscopy |
Primary outcome
The primary endpoint was the number of cancerous lesions and polyps detected on CCE compared to conventional colonoscopy
Time frame: 7 Months
1 secondary outcome
Secondary endpoints were completeness of the exam completeness, patient acceptance and adherence to preparation regimen
Time frame: 7 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 7 Oct 2009.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 20565828Pilz JB, Portmann S, Peter S, Beglinger C, Degen L. Colon Capsule Endoscopy compared to Conventional Colonoscopy under routine screening conditions. BMC Gastroenterol. 2010 Jun 18;10:66. doi: 10.1186/1471-230X-10-66.
Related trials for Colorectal 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
RecruitingObservational study
Pre- and On-treatment Multi-omics Profiling of Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer
Rectal Neoplasms
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
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.
Julia B Pilz, MD principal investigator
University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
Christoph Beglinger, MD study director
University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
Lukas Degen, MD study chair
University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Colon capsule endoscopy and Conventional Colonoscopy in people with Colorectal Cancer, run by University Hospital, Basel, Switzerland at 1 site in Switzerland.
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 3 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 7 Oct 2009. 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 Switzerland. 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?
The primary endpoint was the number of cancerous lesions and polyps detected on CCE compared to conventional colonoscopy (time frame: 7 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 NCT00991003, which also lists 1 linked publication.
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 7 Oct 2009.