CancerNCT01964222
Health Literacy Intervention for Informed Consent of Cancer Patients Considering Clinical Trial Participation
A study testing Decision Aid (DA) in people with Cancer, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
This study will update an existing health literacy intervention (decision aid) for informed consent procedures and then conduct a randomized experiment implementing the health literacy intervention at Siteman Cancer Center and evaluate its effectiveness compared to usual care. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older
- Conditions the study is for
- Cancer
- What is being tested?
- Decision Aid (DA)
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 201 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- May 2014to Jul 2015
- Phase
- Interventional
- Are there results?
- Yes, posted in the registrySummary in the doctors' view
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
Who may be able to join
- Diagnosed with cancer in the past 6 months
- English speaking
- At least 18 years old
Who cannot join
- Past participation in a clinical trial for treatment
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: A Mixed Methods Study to Reduce Disparities in Cancer Clinical Trials by Adapting a Health Literacy Intervention for Informed Consent and Comparing it to Usual Care in a Randomized Experiment
This study will update an existing health literacy intervention (decision aid) for informed consent procedures and then conduct a randomized experiment implementing the health literacy intervention at Siteman Cancer Center and evaluate its effectiveness compared to usual care. Our hypothesis is that implementing the targeted, web-based decision aid (DA) in addition to usual care will increase knowledge about cancer clinical trials. Secondary outcomes include patients' ability to communicate with health care providers about trials, willingness to participate in trials, and enrollment rates for minority participants.
Read the detailed description
A previously developed and pilot tested web-based decision aid (DA) based on best practices in health literacy that is well received by minority participants and significantly improved knowledge about cancer clinical trials and decision self-efficacy will be used. This study will expand the reach of the DA and test it in a larger study in a different geographic region and center (Siteman Cancer Center). An additional benefit of conducting this work at Siteman Cancer Center is that Siteman and the Program for the Elimination of Cancer Disparities (PECaD) already institute structural changes at the system level to improve minority participation in trials. This study will activate and educate patients and will complement the system-level interventions.
By random 1:1 assignment, 180 participants will either receive:
*Targeted, web-based decision aid (DA) about participating in cancer clinical trials.
or
*Usual care/control-Access to the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials.
Outcomes from the DA group will be compared to outcomes in a usual care/control group.
- Conditions
- Cancer
- Being tested
- Decision Aid (DA)
- Keywords
- Cancer, Clinical trials, Informed consent, Health literacy
- Medical subject headings
- Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
Decision Aid (DA)Behavioural
Participants will be shown (on a computer) a targeted, web-based decision aid focused on the topic of clinical trials in addition to usual care.
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Aid (DA) | Experimental | The decision aid (DA) will be provided to patients randomized to the experimental/intervention group. Receives: Behavioral: Decision Aid (DA) |
| Control | No intervention | Participants randomized to the control group will receive usual care and will be shown Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Knowledge About Cancer Clinical Trials
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include eleven knowledge items such as "Only very sick patients are asked to take part in a cancer research study" and "Cancer research studies almost never involve the use of a placebo or sugar pill alone". Participants will indicate each item as "True", "False", or "I don't know". An overall knowledge composite score will be created with the average percentage of items participants in each condition correctly answer. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Clarity of Values
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include the Values Clarity Subscale to evaluate decisional conflict. The subscale includes two items from the ten-item Low Literacy Decisional Conflict Scale, each with three response categories. The combined score on the two items will be divided by 2 and multiplied by 25 to produce an overall "values clarity" score from 0 to 100. Higher values represent less clarity. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Uncertainty in Choice
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include the Uncertainty Subscale to evaluate decisional conflict. The subscale includes two items from the ten-item Low Literacy Decisional Conflict Scale, each with three response categories. The combined score on the two items will be divided by 2 and multiplied by 25 to produce an overall "uncertainty" score from 0 to 100. Higher values represent more uncertainty. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Secondary outcomes (2)
Self-efficacy for Communicating About Cancer Clinical Trials
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include an item in which participants rank their self-efficacy for finding information about cancer clinical trials on a 5-point scale with higher numbers indicating greater self-efficacy. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Attitudes About Cancer Clinical Trials
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include two items in which participants rank their intent to participate in a cancer clinical trial and their intent to encourage others to participate in a cancer clinical trial on a 5-point scale with higher numbers indicating greater intent. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted17 Oct 2013 (estimated)
- Study startMay 2014
- Primary completionMay 2015
- Study completionJul 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, outcome measures and adverse events reported by the sponsor.
- Publications (20)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Washington University School of MedicineThe 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
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 201 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of Medicine
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Miami
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Mary C Politi, PhD, Principal investigator, Washington University School of Medicine
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01964222
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 201309076
- Status last verified
- Nov 2015
- First submitted
- 7 Oct 2013
- Last updated
- 7 Dec 2015
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2720-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.22.2720.
PubMed 15187053Janet Yang Z, McComas K, Gay G, Leonard JP, Dannenberg AJ, Dillon H. From information processing to behavioral intentions: exploring cancer patients' motivations for clinical trial enrollment. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 May;79(2):231-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.08.010. Epub 2009 Sep 11.
PubMed 19748204Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Participants; Federman DD, Hanna KE, Rodriguez LL, editors. Responsible Research: A Systems Approach to Protecting Research Participants. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2002. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK43563/
PubMed 20669487Silverman H, Hull SC, Sugarman J. Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial. Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;29(2):235-41. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00002.
PubMed 11246299McNutt LA, Waltermaurer E, Bednarczyk RA, Carlson BE, Kotval J, McCauley J, Campbell JC, Ford DE. Are We Misjudging How Well Informed Consent Forms are Read? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008 Mar;3(1):89-97. doi: 10.1525/jer.2008.3.1.89.
PubMed 19385786Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol. 1994 Oct;12(10):2211-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.10.2211.
PubMed 7931491Corbie-Smith G, Thomas SB, Williams MV, Moody-Ayers S. Attitudes and beliefs of African Americans toward participation in medical research. J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Sep;14(9):537-46. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.07048.x.
PubMed 10491242Featherstone K, Donovan JL. Random allocation or allocation at random? Patients' perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1998 Oct 31;317(7167):1177-80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1177.
PubMed 9794849Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2001 Nov 24;358(9295):1772-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06805-2.
PubMed 11734235Dresden GM, Levitt MA. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;8(3):246-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01300.x.
PubMed 11229946Young DR, Hooker DT, Freeberg FE. Informed consent documents: increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB. 1990 May-Jun;12(3):1-5. No abstract available.
PubMed 11651387Krumholz HM. Informed consent to promote patient-centered care. JAMA. 2010 Mar 24;303(12):1190-1. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.309. No abstract available.
PubMed 20332406Coyne CA, Xu R, Raich P, Plomer K, Dignan M, Wenzel LB, Fairclough D, Habermann T, Schnell L, Quella S, Cella D; Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. Randomized, controlled trial of an easy-to-read informed consent statement for clinical trial participation: a study of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2003 Mar 1;21(5):836-42. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2003.07.022.
PubMed 12610182Davis TC, Holcombe RF, Berkel HJ, Pramanik S, Divers SG. Informed consent for clinical trials: a comparative study of standard versus simplified forms. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998 May 6;90(9):668-74. doi: 10.1093/jnci/90.9.668.
PubMed 9586663Flory J, Emanuel E. Interventions to improve research participants' understanding in informed consent for research: a systematic review. JAMA. 2004 Oct 6;292(13):1593-601. doi: 10.1001/jama.292.13.1593.
PubMed 15467062
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 7 Dec 2015. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Mixed Methods Study to Reduce Disparities in Cancer Clinical Trials by Adapting a Health Literacy Intervention for Informed Consent and Comparing it to Usual Care in a Randomized Experiment
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT01964222
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- 201309076
- Conditions
- Cancer
- Keywords
- Cancer, Clinical trials, Informed consent, Health literacy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 201 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Washington University School of MedicineUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- University of Miami
- Study start
- May 2014
- Primary completion
- May 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- Jul 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 17 Oct 2013 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 7 Dec 2015
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study will update an existing health literacy intervention (decision aid) for informed consent procedures and then conduct a randomized experiment implementing the health literacy intervention at Siteman Cancer Center and evaluate its effectiveness compared to usual care. Our hypothesis is that implementing the targeted, web-based decision aid (DA) in addition to usual care will increase knowledge about cancer clinical trials. Secondary outcomes include patients' ability to communicate with health care providers about trials, willingness to participate in trials, and enrollment rates for minority participants.
Detailed description
A previously developed and pilot tested web-based decision aid (DA) based on best practices in health literacy that is well received by minority participants and significantly improved knowledge about cancer clinical trials and decision self-efficacy will be used. This study will expand the reach of the DA and test it in a larger study in a different geographic region and center (Siteman Cancer Center). An additional benefit of conducting this work at Siteman Cancer Center is that Siteman and the Program for the Elimination of Cancer Disparities (PECaD) already institute structural changes at the system level to improve minority participation in trials. This study will activate and educate patients and will complement the system-level interventions.
By random 1:1 assignment, 180 participants will either receive:
*Targeted, web-based decision aid (DA) about participating in cancer clinical trials.
or
*Usual care/control-Access to the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials.
Outcomes from the DA group will be compared to outcomes in a usual care/control group.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Supportive care
- Allocation
- Randomised
- Intervention model
- Parallel groups
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Aid (DA) | Experimental | Behavioral: Decision Aid (DA)The decision aid (DA) will be provided to patients randomized to the experimental/intervention group. |
| Control | No intervention | –Participants randomized to the control group will receive usual care and will be shown Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (3 listed)
- Diagnosed with cancer in the past 6 months
- English speaking
- At least 18 years old
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Past participation in a clinical trial for treatment
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 |
|---|---|---|
| Decision Aid (DA)Participants will be shown (on a computer) a targeted, web-based decision aid focused on the topic of clinical trials in addition to usual care. | Behavioural | Decision Aid (DA) |
Primary outcome
Knowledge About Cancer Clinical Trials
Time frame: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include eleven knowledge items such as "Only very sick patients are asked to take part in a cancer research study" and "Cancer research studies almost never involve the use of a placebo or sugar pill alone". Participants will indicate each item as "True", "False", or "I don't know". An overall knowledge composite score will be created with the average percentage of items participants in each condition correctly answer. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Clarity of Values
Time frame: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include the Values Clarity Subscale to evaluate decisional conflict. The subscale includes two items from the ten-item Low Literacy Decisional Conflict Scale, each with three response categories. The combined score on the two items will be divided by 2 and multiplied by 25 to produce an overall "values clarity" score from 0 to 100. Higher values represent less clarity. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
Uncertainty in Choice
Time frame: 1 day Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
A questionnaire will be administered to assess outcomes of interest immediately after showing the participant either the decision aid (DA) about clinical trials or the Siteman Cancer Center website about clinical trials. The questionnaire will include the Uncertainty Subscale to evaluate decisional conflict. The subscale includes two items from the ten-item Low Literacy Decisional Conflict Scale, each with three response categories. The combined score on the two items will be divided by 2 and multiplied by 25 to produce an overall "uncertainty" score from 0 to 100. Higher values represent more uncertainty. Participation in study concludes upon completion of questionnaire.
2 secondary outcomes
Self-efficacy for Communicating About Cancer Clinical Trials
Time frame: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Attitudes About Cancer Clinical Trials
Time frame: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 7 Dec 2015.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 15187053Murthy VH, Krumholz HM, Gross CP. Participation in cancer clinical trials: race-, sex-, and age-based disparities. JAMA. 2004 Jun 9;291(22):2720-6. doi: 10.1001/jama.291.22.2720.
- Background: PubMed 19748204Janet Yang Z, McComas K, Gay G, Leonard JP, Dannenberg AJ, Dillon H. From information processing to behavioral intentions: exploring cancer patients' motivations for clinical trial enrollment. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 May;79(2):231-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.08.010. Epub 2009 Sep 11.
- Background: PubMed 20669487Institute of Medicine (US) Committee on Assessing the System for Protecting Human Research Participants; Federman DD, Hanna KE, Rodriguez LL, editors. Responsible Research: A Systems Approach to Protecting Research Participants. Washington (DC): National Academies Press (US); 2002. Available from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK43563/
- Background: PubMed 11246299Silverman H, Hull SC, Sugarman J. Variability among institutional review boards' decisions within the context of a multicenter trial. Crit Care Med. 2001 Feb;29(2):235-41. doi: 10.1097/00003246-200102000-00002.
- Background: PubMed 19385786McNutt LA, Waltermaurer E, Bednarczyk RA, Carlson BE, Kotval J, McCauley J, Campbell JC, Ford DE. Are We Misjudging How Well Informed Consent Forms are Read? J Empir Res Hum Res Ethics. 2008 Mar;3(1):89-97. doi: 10.1525/jer.2008.3.1.89.
- Background: PubMed 7931491Grossman SA, Piantadosi S, Covahey C. Are informed consent forms that describe clinical oncology research protocols readable by most patients and their families? J Clin Oncol. 1994 Oct;12(10):2211-5. doi: 10.1200/JCO.1994.12.10.2211.
- Background: PubMed 10491242Corbie-Smith G, Thomas SB, Williams MV, Moody-Ayers S. Attitudes and beliefs of African Americans toward participation in medical research. J Gen Intern Med. 1999 Sep;14(9):537-46. doi: 10.1046/j.1525-1497.1999.07048.x.
- Background: PubMed 9794849Featherstone K, Donovan JL. Random allocation or allocation at random? Patients' perspectives of participation in a randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 1998 Oct 31;317(7167):1177-80. doi: 10.1136/bmj.317.7167.1177.
- Background: PubMed 11734235Joffe S, Cook EF, Cleary PD, Clark JW, Weeks JC. Quality of informed consent in cancer clinical trials: a cross-sectional survey. Lancet. 2001 Nov 24;358(9295):1772-7. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(01)06805-2.
- Background: PubMed 11229946Dresden GM, Levitt MA. Modifying a standard industry clinical trial consent form improves patient information retention as part of the informed consent process. Acad Emerg Med. 2001 Mar;8(3):246-52. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2001.tb01300.x.
- Background: PubMed 11651387Young DR, Hooker DT, Freeberg FE. Informed consent documents: increasing comprehension by reducing reading level. IRB. 1990 May-Jun;12(3):1-5. No abstract available.
- Background: PubMed 20332406Krumholz HM. Informed consent to promote patient-centered care. JAMA. 2010 Mar 24;303(12):1190-1. doi: 10.1001/jama.2010.309. No abstract available.
Related trials for 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
RecruitingPhase 2
Tafasitamab With Acalabrutinib and Venetoclax for the Treatment of Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia, Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia/Small Lymphocytic Lymphoma
Active, not recruitingPhase 1/2
Selumetinib in Treating Young Patients With Recurrent or Refractory Low Grade Glioma
Low Grade Glioma, Recurrent Childhood Pilocytic Astrocytoma
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
A Single-Arm Study of Nimotuzumab Combined With NALIRIFOX as First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
Recruiting
Methylation Profiling in Self-Samples for Identification of (Epi)Genetic Biomarkers for Gynecological Cancers
Gynaecological Cancers, Ovarian 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.
Mary C Politi, PhD principal investigator
Washington University School of Medicine
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing Decision Aid (DA) in people with Cancer, run by Washington University School of Medicine at 1 site in United States.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 3 inclusion and 1 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 7 Dec 2015. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United States. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
Yes. Results are posted in the registry (first posted 7 Dec 2015). A summary is in the For doctors view, and the full results are on ClinicalTrials.gov.
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?
Knowledge About Cancer Clinical Trials (time frame: 1 day (Immediately following either showing the participant the experimental or control information (same day)). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. 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 NCT01964222, which also lists 20 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 7 Dec 2015; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 8 Nov 2026.