Pancreatic NeoplasmCOSNCT02181140
Core Biopsy Endo Sonography Study Evaluation of the Significance of the Pro-core® Needle
A study testing EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction in people with Pancreatic Neoplasm, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
Trial summary
The study is designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a new designed endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) Core biopsy aspiration needle in comparison to a conventional EUS aspiration needle in GI-tumors. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Pancreatic Neoplasm
- What is being tested?
- EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction
- Type of treatment
- Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 56 participants
- Where
- 1 siteGermany
- Study dates
- Aug 2011to Oct 2014
- 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
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- clinical indication for endoscopic ultrasound diagnostics with fine needle biopsies
- age greater than 18 years
Who cannot join
- difficult or impossible approach to desired structures due to anatomy (postoperative anatomy, e.g.)
- cystic lesion, e.g. cystic pancreas tumors
- coagulopathy
- severe general condition of the patient
- other contraindications for endoscopical ultrasound aided fine needle punction
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Prospective Evaluation of the Significance of the Pro-core® Needle in Differential Diagnosis of Tumorous and Inflammatory Processes
The study is designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a new designed endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) Core biopsy aspiration needle in comparison to a conventional EUS aspiration needle in GI-tumors.
Read the detailed description
Endoscopic ultrasound is an established examination method for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and the pancreas. Since imaging by itself is limited in differential diagnosis of tumors, EUS guided fine needle aspiration is seen as a valid complementary method. Since fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is mainly based on cytological diagnostics, this method is limited also because of lacking supplementary immune- histochemical diagnostics. Here, the obtainment of little histologically evaluable tissue samples (punched barrels) would be of benefit.
A new punch needle device called Pro-core needle (Cook)(22 / 19 gauges) offers the possibility of increasing numbers of valid extractions of histologically evaluable tissues due to a better targeted precision and maneuverability in comparison to other devices of that kind (tru-cut needles, e.g.). A little notch at the pinpoint allows the obtainment of little tissue samples, that will be kept within the device by aspiration.
This study compares the obtainment of tissue by Proc-core needle and conventional aspiration punction systems.
- Conditions
- Pancreatic Neoplasm
- Being tested
- EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction
- Keywords
- fine needle aspiration, core biopsy, endoscopic ultrasound, space occupying process mediastinal, perigastral, perihilar, suspect lymph nodes mediastinal, perigastral or perihilar, diagnostic accuracy of EUS guided core biopsy
- Medical subject headings
- Pancreatic Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
EUS guided FNA and fine needle punctionDevice
punction of a suspect area by a EUS guided fine needle as well as pro core fine needle to evacuate histology and smear biologics
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction | Other | punction of endosonographically identified space-occupying process with aspirating fine needle and pro core fine needle in a randomized order Receives: Device: EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Diagnostic Accuracy
Diagnostic accuracy of Pro-core needle (22 G) will be compared to conventional fine needle aspiration (22 G). Therefore EUS-FNA with both needles is undertaken in a random order in each lesion. For Pro-core needle, a histological / cytological diagnosis and quality assessment will be made by pathologists.For Echotip aspiration needle, reference cytology evaluation is done by cytology experts.
The histopathological diagnosis after surgery or the clinical follow up of at least one year after EUS FNA is current standard.
Measured: up to 1 year
Secondary outcomes (2)
EUS Pro Core FNA: Histology Samples
Histology (not cytology) samples for Pro-core Needle: Number of adequately evaluable histology samples
Measured: day 0 and day 14
Complication Rates
Complication rates of EUS FNA
Measured: day 0 and day 14
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted3 Jul 2014 (estimated)
- Study startAug 2011
- Primary completionOct 2014
- Study completionOct 2014
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 (23)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Pancreatic NeoplasmStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfThe 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
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Prof. Dr. Thomas Rösch, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
- Investigators
- Thomas Rösch, Prof. Dr., Principal investigator, University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02181140
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- PV 3835
- Acronym
- COS
- Status last verified
- Apr 2019
- First submitted
- 8 Jul 2013
- Last updated
- 18 Jun 2019
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Parikh P, Shiloach M, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, Ko CY, Hall BL, Pitt HA. Pancreatectomy risk calculator: an ACS-NSQIP resource. HPB (Oxford). 2010 Sep;12(7):488-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00216.x.
PubMed 20815858van der Gaag NA, Rauws EA, van Eijck CH, Bruno MJ, van der Harst E, Kubben FJ, Gerritsen JJ, Greve JW, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Klinkenbijl JH, Nio CY, de Castro SM, Busch OR, van Gulik TM, Bossuyt PM, Gouma DJ. Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pancreas. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jan 14;362(2):129-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0903230.
PubMed 20071702Moller K, Papanikolaou IS, Toermer T, Delicha EM, Sarbia M, Schenck U, Koch M, Al-Abadi H, Meining A, Schmidt H, Schulz HJ, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: high yield of 2 passes with combined histologic-cytologic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jul;70(1):60-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.008. Epub 2009 Apr 25.
PubMed 19394012Takahashi K, Yamao K, Okubo K, Sawaki A, Mizuno N, Ashida R, Koshikawa T, Ueyama Y, Kasugai K, Hase S, Kakumu S. Differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and focal pancreatitis by using EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jan;61(1):76-9. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02224-2.
PubMed 15672060Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Munoz E, Lozano-Leon A, Abdulkader I, Larino-Noia J, Antunez J, Forteza J. Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic masses. World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan 14;13(2):289-93. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i2.289.
PubMed 17226911Sudhoff T, Hollerbach S, Wilhelms I, Willert J, Reiser M, Topalidis T, Schmiegel W, Graeven U. [Clinical utility of EUS-FNA in upper gastrointestinal and mediastinal disease]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2004 Oct 15;129(42):2227-32. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-831867. German.
PubMed 15483756Aithal GP, Anagnostopoulos GK, Tam W, Dean J, Zaitoun A, Kocjan G, Ragunath K, Pereira SP. EUS-guided tissue sampling: comparison of "dual sampling" (Trucut biopsy plus FNA) with "sequential sampling" (Trucut biopsy and then FNA as required). Endoscopy. 2007 Aug;39(8):725-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966400. Epub 2007 Jul 10.
PubMed 17620230Wittmann J, Kocjan G, Sgouros SN, Deheragoda M, Pereira SP. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling by combined fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy: a prospective study. Cytopathology. 2006 Feb;17(1):27-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00313.x.
PubMed 16417562Shah SM, Ribeiro A, Levi J, Jorda M, Rocha-Lima C, Sleeman D, Hamilton-Nelson K, Ganjei-Azar P, Barkin J. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with and without trucut biopsy of pancreatic masses. JOP. 2008 Jul 10;9(4):422-30.
PubMed 18648133Storch I, Shah M, Thurer R, Donna E, Ribeiro A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and Trucut biopsy in thoracic lesions: when tissue is the issue. Surg Endosc. 2008 Jan;22(1):86-90. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9374-x. Epub 2007 May 4.
PubMed 17479313Storch I, Jorda M, Thurer R, Raez L, Rocha-Lima C, Vernon S, Ribeiro A. Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Oct;64(4):505-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.02.056. Epub 2006 Jun 6.
PubMed 16996340Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Guldhammer Skov B, Georgescu CV. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut biopsy adds significant information to EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration in selected patients: a prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan;42(1):117-25. doi: 10.1080/00365520600789800.
PubMed 17190771Sakamoto H, Kitano M, Komaki T, Noda K, Chikugo T, Dote K, Takeyama Y, Das K, Yamao K, Kudo M. Prospective comparative study of the EUS guided 25-gauge FNA needle with the 19-gauge Trucut needle and 22-gauge FNA needle in patients with solid pancreatic masses. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2009 Mar;24(3):384-90. doi: 10.1111/j.1440-1746.2008.05636.x. Epub 2008 Nov 20.
PubMed 19032453Siddiqui UD, Rossi F, Rosenthal LS, Padda MS, Murali-Dharan V, Aslanian HR. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: a prospective, randomized trial comparing 22-gauge and 25-gauge needles. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Dec;70(6):1093-7. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2009.05.037. Epub 2009 Jul 28.
PubMed 19640524Jenssen C, Faiss S, Nurnberg D. [Complications of endoscopic ultrasound and endoscopic ultrasound-guided interventions - results of a survey among German centers]. Z Gastroenterol. 2008 Oct;46(10):1177-84. doi: 10.1055/s-2008-1027334. Epub 2008 Oct 20. German.
PubMed 18937186
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Jun 2019. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Prospective Evaluation of the Significance of the Pro-core® Needle in Differential Diagnosis of Tumorous and Inflammatory Processes
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02181140
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- COS / PV 3835
- Conditions
- Pancreatic Neoplasm
- Keywords
- fine needle aspiration, core biopsy, endoscopic ultrasound, space occupying process mediastinal, perigastral, perihilar, suspect lymph nodes mediastinal, perigastral or perihilar, diagnostic accuracy of EUS guided core biopsy
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 56 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-EppendorfUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- Aug 2011
- Primary completion
- Oct 2014 (actual)
- Study completion
- Oct 2014 (actual)
- First posted
- 3 Jul 2014 (estimated)
- Results
- Posted 16 Sep 2015
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The study is designed to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of a new designed endoscopic ultrasonography (EUS) Core biopsy aspiration needle in comparison to a conventional EUS aspiration needle in GI-tumors.
Detailed description
Endoscopic ultrasound is an established examination method for tumors of the gastrointestinal tract and the pancreas. Since imaging by itself is limited in differential diagnosis of tumors, EUS guided fine needle aspiration is seen as a valid complementary method. Since fine-needle aspiration (FNA) is mainly based on cytological diagnostics, this method is limited also because of lacking supplementary immune- histochemical diagnostics. Here, the obtainment of little histologically evaluable tissue samples (punched barrels) would be of benefit.
A new punch needle device called Pro-core needle (Cook)(22 / 19 gauges) offers the possibility of increasing numbers of valid extractions of histologically evaluable tissues due to a better targeted precision and maneuverability in comparison to other devices of that kind (tru-cut needles, e.g.). A little notch at the pinpoint allows the obtainment of little tissue samples, that will be kept within the device by aspiration.
This study compares the obtainment of tissue by Proc-core needle and conventional aspiration punction systems.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction | Other | Device: EUS guided FNA and fine needle punctionpunction of endosonographically identified space-occupying process with aspirating fine needle and pro core fine needle in a randomized order |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- clinical indication for endoscopic ultrasound diagnostics with fine needle biopsies
- age greater than 18 years
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- difficult or impossible approach to desired structures due to anatomy (postoperative anatomy, e.g.)
- cystic lesion, e.g. cystic pancreas tumors
- coagulopathy
- severe general condition of the patient
- other contraindications for endoscopical ultrasound aided fine needle punction
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 |
|---|---|---|
| EUS guided FNA and fine needle punctionpunction of a suspect area by a EUS guided fine needle as well as pro core fine needle to evacuate histology and smear biologics | Device | EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction |
Primary outcome
Diagnostic Accuracy
Time frame: up to 1 year
Diagnostic accuracy of Pro-core needle (22 G) will be compared to conventional fine needle aspiration (22 G). Therefore EUS-FNA with both needles is undertaken in a random order in each lesion. For Pro-core needle, a histological / cytological diagnosis and quality assessment will be made by pathologists.For Echotip aspiration needle, reference cytology evaluation is done by cytology experts. The histopathological diagnosis after surgery or the clinical follow up of at least one year after EUS FNA is current standard.
2 secondary outcomes
EUS Pro Core FNA: Histology Samples
Time frame: day 0 and day 14
Complication Rates
Time frame: day 0 and day 14
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Jun 2019.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Background: PubMed 20815858Parikh P, Shiloach M, Cohen ME, Bilimoria KY, Ko CY, Hall BL, Pitt HA. Pancreatectomy risk calculator: an ACS-NSQIP resource. HPB (Oxford). 2010 Sep;12(7):488-97. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-2574.2010.00216.x.
- Background: PubMed 20071702van der Gaag NA, Rauws EA, van Eijck CH, Bruno MJ, van der Harst E, Kubben FJ, Gerritsen JJ, Greve JW, Gerhards MF, de Hingh IH, Klinkenbijl JH, Nio CY, de Castro SM, Busch OR, van Gulik TM, Bossuyt PM, Gouma DJ. Preoperative biliary drainage for cancer of the head of the pancreas. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jan 14;362(2):129-37. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0903230.
- Background: PubMed 19394012Moller K, Papanikolaou IS, Toermer T, Delicha EM, Sarbia M, Schenck U, Koch M, Al-Abadi H, Meining A, Schmidt H, Schulz HJ, Wiedenmann B, Rosch T. EUS-guided FNA of solid pancreatic masses: high yield of 2 passes with combined histologic-cytologic analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Jul;70(1):60-9. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.10.008. Epub 2009 Apr 25.
- Background: PubMed 15672060Takahashi K, Yamao K, Okubo K, Sawaki A, Mizuno N, Ashida R, Koshikawa T, Ueyama Y, Kasugai K, Hase S, Kakumu S. Differential diagnosis of pancreatic cancer and focal pancreatitis by using EUS-guided FNA. Gastrointest Endosc. 2005 Jan;61(1):76-9. doi: 10.1016/s0016-5107(04)02224-2.
- Background: PubMed 17226911Iglesias-Garcia J, Dominguez-Munoz E, Lozano-Leon A, Abdulkader I, Larino-Noia J, Antunez J, Forteza J. Impact of endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle biopsy for diagnosis of pancreatic masses. World J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan 14;13(2):289-93. doi: 10.3748/wjg.v13.i2.289.
- Background: PubMed 15483756Sudhoff T, Hollerbach S, Wilhelms I, Willert J, Reiser M, Topalidis T, Schmiegel W, Graeven U. [Clinical utility of EUS-FNA in upper gastrointestinal and mediastinal disease]. Dtsch Med Wochenschr. 2004 Oct 15;129(42):2227-32. doi: 10.1055/s-2004-831867. German.
- Background: PubMed 17620230Aithal GP, Anagnostopoulos GK, Tam W, Dean J, Zaitoun A, Kocjan G, Ragunath K, Pereira SP. EUS-guided tissue sampling: comparison of "dual sampling" (Trucut biopsy plus FNA) with "sequential sampling" (Trucut biopsy and then FNA as required). Endoscopy. 2007 Aug;39(8):725-30. doi: 10.1055/s-2007-966400. Epub 2007 Jul 10.
- Background: PubMed 16417562Wittmann J, Kocjan G, Sgouros SN, Deheragoda M, Pereira SP. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided tissue sampling by combined fine needle aspiration and trucut needle biopsy: a prospective study. Cytopathology. 2006 Feb;17(1):27-33. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2303.2006.00313.x.
- Background: PubMed 18648133Shah SM, Ribeiro A, Levi J, Jorda M, Rocha-Lima C, Sleeman D, Hamilton-Nelson K, Ganjei-Azar P, Barkin J. EUS-guided fine needle aspiration with and without trucut biopsy of pancreatic masses. JOP. 2008 Jul 10;9(4):422-30.
- Background: PubMed 17479313Storch I, Shah M, Thurer R, Donna E, Ribeiro A. Endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration and Trucut biopsy in thoracic lesions: when tissue is the issue. Surg Endosc. 2008 Jan;22(1):86-90. doi: 10.1007/s00464-007-9374-x. Epub 2007 May 4.
- Background: PubMed 16996340Storch I, Jorda M, Thurer R, Raez L, Rocha-Lima C, Vernon S, Ribeiro A. Advantage of EUS Trucut biopsy combined with fine-needle aspiration without immediate on-site cytopathologic examination. Gastrointest Endosc. 2006 Oct;64(4):505-11. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2006.02.056. Epub 2006 Jun 6.
- Background: PubMed 17190771Saftoiu A, Vilmann P, Guldhammer Skov B, Georgescu CV. Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS)-guided Trucut biopsy adds significant information to EUS-guided fine-needle aspiration in selected patients: a prospective study. Scand J Gastroenterol. 2007 Jan;42(1):117-25. doi: 10.1080/00365520600789800.
Related trials for Pancreatic Neoplasm
Enrolling by invitationPhase 2
A Single-Arm Study of Nimotuzumab Combined With NALIRIFOX as First-Line Treatment for Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
RecruitingPhase 2/3
Multicenter Validation Trial of [18F]AlF-FAPI-74 for PET Imaging of Cancer-associated Fibroblasts Through Fibroblast Activation Protein Inhibitors (FAPI) in Different Tumor Types
Oesophageal Cancer, Gastric Cancer
RecruitingPhase 1
Modified FOLFIRINOX and Pentamidine in Advanced and Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer
Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma (PDAC)
RecruitingPhase 3
Atebimetinib + GnP as a First Line Treatment in Patients With Metastatic Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma
Pancreatic Cancer, Pancreatic Cancer Metastatic
RecruitingPhase 3
Lanreotide Versus Placebo Before Surgery to Prevent a Surgical Complication Called a Pancreatic Fistula
Pancreatic Carcinoma, Pancreatic Neoplasm
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.
Thomas Rösch, Prof. Dr. principal investigator
University Hospital Eppendorf, Hamburg
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing EUS guided FNA and fine needle punction in people with Pancreatic Neoplasm, run by Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf at 1 site in Germany.
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 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 18 Jun 2019. 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 Germany. 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 16 Sep 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?
Diagnostic Accuracy (time frame: up to 1 year). 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 NCT02181140, which also lists 23 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 18 Jun 2019.