Prostate CancerIP3-PROSPECTNCT04400656
PROState Pathway Embedded Comparative Trial
An observational study of Prostate Cancer and Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, run by Imperial College London at 3 sites in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
The proposal will explore a trial design called the cohort-multiple RCT (cmRCT) or as it has been recently coined, the Trials WithIn Cohorts (TWICS) design. This design has been used in a number of disease areas, both benign and cancer. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and older, men only
- Conditions the study is for
- Prostate Cancer, Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, Metastatic Prostate Cancer
- How many people
- 139 participants
- Where
- 3 sitesUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 8 Sep 2020to 31 Aug 2022
- Phase
- Observational
- 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
- Men only
- No healthy volunteers
- Adult, Older adult
Study population: All men referred for investigation of prostate cancer
Who may be able to join
- Men aged 18 years old and over who are referred for investigations for urinary symptoms or elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels or other risk factors for possible prostate malignancy.
- An understanding of the English language sufficient to understand written and verbal information about the trial and consent process.
- Estimated life expectancy of 5 years or more.
- Signed informed consent.
Who cannot join
- 1. Men who are unable to give informed consent.
Trial locations and contacts
3 sites in 1 country.
United Kingdom3 sites
Ashford & St Peter's Hospitals (ASPH) NHS Foundation Trust
Chertsey, Surrey, KT16 0PZ
West Middlesex University Hospital
Isleworth, Middlesex, TW7 6AF
Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust
London, W6 8RF
About this study
The proposal will explore a trial design called the cohort-multiple RCT (cmRCT) or as it has been recently coined, the Trials WithIn Cohorts (TWICS) design. This design has been used in a number of disease areas, both benign and cancer. Prostate conditions have been chosen since they are extremely common and if malignancy occurs the majority of men with the disease are regarded as living with a chronic condition due to its long natural history and in which innovative approaches, interventions, treatments or changes in management might have a significant patient benefit and impact on the NHS. It therefore fits the cmRCT design very well. Nonetheless, the lessons learned in this study will be of relevance to other disease spaces.
The TWICS or cmRCT design is currently being used in elderly patients, risk of falls, depression, hip fracture, Yorkshire Health Study, scleroderma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, bladder cancer and kidney cancer, to name a few. In total, a recent systematic review showed that there were 18 ongoing cmRCT studies with 6 in the UK.
The acceptability and feasibility of the cmRCT in the prostate pathway will be tested. This is the first time this method will be tested and therefore piloted. In the first part of the study, the following will be evaluated. What is the accrual rate? What do patients and their healthcare professionals think of the cmRCT design? Is the data collected robust? What are the resource requirements of such a study?A number of novel interventions or changes in the pathway will then be tested and compared to standard care in the cohort that was recruited.
Read the detailed description
TRIAL AIMS
The pilot phase of PROSPECT is interested in investigating the a) acceptability and feasibility of establishing the cohort of men, i.e. putting the questions of Point of Consent One to men being referred for investigation of prostate cancer, and b) observing the cohort over the study period and collecting data on the participants pertaining to their disease, their treatment and their health status.
- Acceptability
AIM 1.1: To determine what proportion of men with a clinical suspicion for prostate cancer will participate in an cmRCT.
OBJECTIVE 1.1a: To evaluate proportion of patients approached who agree to participate in the longitudinal cohort. This will be done by calculating the participation rates from men approached for invitation to PROSPECT.
AIM 1.2: To explore barriers and facilitators to implementation of a cmRCT in order to improve and inform patient and/or physician trial information, study processes, interventions, and recruitment and retention of patients. This will be carried out by qualitative assessments in the following areas.
OBJECTIVE 1.2a: To investigate by interview the patient experiences and perspectives on;
- Trial participation,
- The point at which men are approached by the research team to enter the cohort,
- Barriers and facilitators to consent to participate in the cohort,
- Barriers and facilitators to consent to future random selection to undergo a new healthcare intervention,
- Acceptability of monitoring of health status and the tools used to do this in the cohort.
OBJECTIVE 1.2b: To investigate by interview the experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses and admin staff) on;
- Trial design and information to patients and healthcare professionals,
- Feasibility of future random invitation of participants to interventions,
- Tools used for measuring health status.
- FEASIBILITY
AIM 2.1: To determine the feasibility of recruitment and logistical implementation of PROSPECT in different data collecting centres based in different institutions. This will be broken down into the following sub-questions;
OBJECTIVE 2.1a: Evaluating how the patients are successfully identified and the option of how inclusion in the trial is presented to them.
OBJECTIVE 2.1b: Evaluate patient questionnaire response rates for pre-treatment quality of life.
OBJECTIVE 2.1c: Evaluate patient questionnaire response rates at pre-determined intervals following on from the point of recruitment into the trial to determine how to promote optimal patient response rate and improve data collection.
OBJECTIVE 2.1d: To evaluate completeness and fidelity of clinical data on the men who participate in the cohort.
STUDY DESIGN
Design
The key features of a cmRCT are;
- Explicitly consented recruitment of a large cohort of patients with the condition of interest.
- Regular measurement of relevant outcome measures for the whole cohort prospectively in the long-term.
- Facility to re-approach cohort participants, who are randomly selected from eligible patients within the cohort, inviting them to undergo intervention of interest to researchers with eligible patients not randomly selected entering the control standard care group (see study flowchart 3.3 / 3.4).
- "Patient-centred" informed consent. The consent process aims to replicate that used in the routine health care setting. Once the patient has been randomly selected for a randomised novel intervention from the eligible patients within the cohort, the second consent process should include detailed and specific information pertaining to the particular intervention or change in management they are being invited to undergo for comparison. Such information will be written and advised using patient representatives and undergo review following submission to REC.
- Comparison of the outcomes in the randomly selected patients with the outcomes in eligible patients not randomly selected.
- Capacity for multiple randomised controlled trials over time within the cohort simultaneously.
CONSENT
For men who are participating in the cmRCT there are two points of consent:
POINT OF CONSENT ONE
At Point of Consent One men who are referred for investigation of prostate cancer will be asked two questions. The first question relates to whether they are willing to join the cohort and have data collected directly from them over time on a regular basis. This data will include health-related quality-of-life data (at recruitment, 0-6, 6, 12, 18 \& 24 months post recruitment), linkage to their medical records so that researchers can know what happens to them over time, and access to other data about them held on national health registry databases. Also, at point of consent one, prospective participants will be asked (second question) whether they agree to being randomly selected in the future to interventions or changes in management in order to compare to standard care. It will be explained that this second invitation will be on a random basis. In other words, everyone eligible within the cohort will have the same chance of being randomly selected. The patient would still have the option of saying 'no' after the random selection when they are approached.
POINT OF CONSENT TWO
The second point of consent is the invitation to undergo an intervention or change in management that the research team wishes to compare to standard care. Participants will have already agreed to the possibility of being invited to undergo intervention at Point of Consent One (i.e. enrolment into the cmRCT). The participant will have been randomly selected from amongst all the eligible men for the given intervention from within the large cmRCT cohort prior to being approached by the trial team. Then, the trial team will approach the participant and invite him to undergo the intervention. This will entail a comprehensive consent process that pertains directly to the intervention being proposed in a patient-centred manner. The participant can agree or refuse to undergo the intervention. If he does not wish to undergo the treatment he will continue under follow-up in PROSPECT.
Participants undergoing intervention will continue to have follow-up in the same manner as men who have not been randomised from within the cohort and thus provide outcome data to form the control arm. Comparison of the outcomes of those men who underwent trial intervention against those who did not will allow us to analyse the effectiveness of the intervention in as robust a manner as possible given that the key feature of randomisation when creating the control vs. the intervention arms has been preserved. As such, the control arm of the cmRCT will be similar to the intervention arm in all features, known and unknown, except the intervention of interest. This will allow for the maintenance of epistemological superiority of the data produced for evaluating new tests or treatments whilst getting to this point in a way that might be more acceptable to patients and therefore more likely to be successful and efficient for researchers.
The second stage of PROSPECT will be to investigate and evaluate in a similarly careful manner the feasibility and acceptability of randomising men from the cohort of eligible men to interventions or changes in management that require evaluation, following submission to REC. As part of the cmRCT design, these men randomly selected are re-approached and invited to consider undergoing the intervention of interest. Patients who are randomly allocated to the control arm will also receive standard of care, and are not informed about their participation in the control arm. This additional consent will be obtained at the time of consent for the cohort study.
STUDY SETTING AND POPULATION
All men referred for investigation of prostate cancer. The inclusion criteria for this cohort is deliberately broad.
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer, Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, Metastatic Prostate Cancer, Prostate Adenocarcinoma, Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma in the Soft Tissue, Prostate Cancer Metastatic
- Keywords
- prostate cancer, Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, Metastatic Prostate Cancer, Prostate Adenocarcinoma, Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma in the Soft Tissue, Prostate Cancer Metastatic, Clinical Trial Design, cohort multiple randomised controlled trial, cmRCT, Trials Within Cohorts, TWICS
- Medical subject headings
- Prostatic Neoplasms
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Number of Men Who Consented to Inclusion in PROSPECT Study Out of Total Number of Patients Approached
Number of men who consented to inclusion in PROSPECT Study out of total number of patients approached at the original point of contact by the research team.
Measured: from baseline to 23 months
Number of Participants Approached for the Study From the Number of Patients Referred to the Study Team by Other Participating Centres
Evaluation of the number of men approached to enter the PROSPECT Study from the number of men referred to the participating centres for investigation of prostate cancer.
Measured: from baseline to 23 months
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on the Quality of Life (EQ5D-5L)
Number of Participants who complete a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ5D-5L) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Measured: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (EPIC-26)
Number of Participants who completed a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (EPIC-26) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Measured: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (IPSS)
Number of Participants who complete a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (IPSS) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT.
Measured: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (IIEF-15)
Number of Participants who completed a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (IIEF-15) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Measured: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted22 May 2020
- Study start8 Sep 2020
- Primary completion31 Aug 2022
- Study completion31 Aug 2022
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 (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Prostate CancerStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by Imperial College LondonThe 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
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Imperial College London
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Wellcome Trust
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Hashim Ahmed, Principal investigator, Imperial College London
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04400656
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 19CX5601
- Acronym
- IP3-PROSPECT
- Status last verified
- Jun 2025
- First submitted
- 11 May 2020
- Last updated
- 18 Jun 2025
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
Publications
Peters M, Eldred-Evans D, Kurver P, Falagario UG, Connor MJ, Shah TT, Verhoeff JJC, Taimen P, Aronen HJ, Knaapila J, Montoya Perez I, Ettala O, Stabile A, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Martini A, Cucchiara V, Briganti A, Lantz A, Picker W, Haug ES, Nordstrom T, Tanaka MB, Reddy D, Bass E, van Rossum PSN, Wong K, Tam H, Winkler M, Gordon S, Qazi H, Bostrom PJ, Jambor I, Ahmed HU. Predicting the Need for Biopsy to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-detected Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert >/=3 Lesion: Development and Multinational External Validation of the Imperial Rapid Access to Prostate Imaging and Diagnosis Risk Score. Eur Urol. 2022 Nov;82(5):559-568. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.022. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
PubMed 35963650
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 18 Jun 2025. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- PROState Pathway Embedded Comparative Trial
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04400656
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- IP3-PROSPECT / 19CX5601
- Conditions
- Prostate Cancer, Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, Metastatic Prostate Cancer, Prostate Adenocarcinoma, Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma in the Soft Tissue, Prostate Cancer Metastatic
- Keywords
- prostate cancer, Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, Metastatic Prostate Cancer, Prostate Adenocarcinoma, Metastatic Prostate Carcinoma in the Soft Tissue, Prostate Cancer Metastatic, Clinical Trial Design, cohort multiple randomised controlled trial
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 139 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- Imperial College LondonUniversity, hospital or other
- Collaborators
- Wellcome Trust
- Study start
- 8 Sep 2020 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 31 Aug 2022 (actual)
- Study completion
- 31 Aug 2022 (actual)
- First posted
- 22 May 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 18 Jun 2025
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
The proposal will explore a trial design called the cohort-multiple RCT (cmRCT) or as it has been recently coined, the Trials WithIn Cohorts (TWICS) design. This design has been used in a number of disease areas, both benign and cancer. Prostate conditions have been chosen since they are extremely common and if malignancy occurs the majority of men with the disease are regarded as living with a chronic condition due to its long natural history and in which innovative approaches, interventions, treatments or changes in management might have a significant patient benefit and impact on the NHS. It therefore fits the cmRCT design very well. Nonetheless, the lessons learned in this study will be of relevance to other disease spaces.
The TWICS or cmRCT design is currently being used in elderly patients, risk of falls, depression, hip fracture, Yorkshire Health Study, scleroderma, breast cancer, colorectal cancer, bladder cancer and kidney cancer, to name a few. In total, a recent systematic review showed that there were 18 ongoing cmRCT studies with 6 in the UK.
The acceptability and feasibility of the cmRCT in the prostate pathway will be tested. This is the first time this method will be tested and therefore piloted. In the first part of the study, the following will be evaluated. What is the accrual rate? What do patients and their healthcare professionals think of the cmRCT design? Is the data collected robust? What are the resource requirements of such a study?A number of novel interventions or changes in the pathway will then be tested and compared to standard care in the cohort that was recruited.
Detailed description
TRIAL AIMS
The pilot phase of PROSPECT is interested in investigating the a) acceptability and feasibility of establishing the cohort of men, i.e. putting the questions of Point of Consent One to men being referred for investigation of prostate cancer, and b) observing the cohort over the study period and collecting data on the participants pertaining to their disease, their treatment and their health status.
- Acceptability
AIM 1.1: To determine what proportion of men with a clinical suspicion for prostate cancer will participate in an cmRCT.
OBJECTIVE 1.1a: To evaluate proportion of patients approached who agree to participate in the longitudinal cohort. This will be done by calculating the participation rates from men approached for invitation to PROSPECT.
AIM 1.2: To explore barriers and facilitators to implementation of a cmRCT in order to improve and inform patient and/or physician trial information, study processes, interventions, and recruitment and retention of patients. This will be carried out by qualitative assessments in the following areas.
OBJECTIVE 1.2a: To investigate by interview the patient experiences and perspectives on;
- Trial participation,
- The point at which men are approached by the research team to enter the cohort,
- Barriers and facilitators to consent to participate in the cohort,
- Barriers and facilitators to consent to future random selection to undergo a new healthcare intervention,
- Acceptability of monitoring of health status and the tools used to do this in the cohort.
OBJECTIVE 1.2b: To investigate by interview the experiences and perspectives of healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses and admin staff) on;
- Trial design and information to patients and healthcare professionals,
- Feasibility of future random invitation of participants to interventions,
- Tools used for measuring health status.
- FEASIBILITY
AIM 2.1: To determine the feasibility of recruitment and logistical implementation of PROSPECT in different data collecting centres based in different institutions. This will be broken down into the following sub-questions;
OBJECTIVE 2.1a: Evaluating how the patients are successfully identified and the option of how inclusion in the trial is presented to them.
OBJECTIVE 2.1b: Evaluate patient questionnaire response rates for pre-treatment quality of life.
OBJECTIVE 2.1c: Evaluate patient questionnaire response rates at pre-determined intervals following on from the point of recruitment into the trial to determine how to promote optimal patient response rate and improve data collection.
OBJECTIVE 2.1d: To evaluate completeness and fidelity of clinical data on the men who participate in the cohort.
STUDY DESIGN
Design
The key features of a cmRCT are;
- Explicitly consented recruitment of a large cohort of patients with the condition of interest.
- Regular measurement of relevant outcome measures for the whole cohort prospectively in the long-term.
- Facility to re-approach cohort participants, who are randomly selected from eligible patients within the cohort, inviting them to undergo intervention of interest to researchers with eligible patients not randomly selected entering the control standard care group (see study flowchart 3.3 / 3.4).
- "Patient-centred" informed consent. The consent process aims to replicate that used in the routine health care setting. Once the patient has been randomly selected for a randomised novel intervention from the eligible patients within the cohort, the second consent process should include detailed and specific information pertaining to the particular intervention or change in management they are being invited to undergo for comparison. Such information will be written and advised using patient representatives and undergo review following submission to REC.
- Comparison of the outcomes in the randomly selected patients with the outcomes in eligible patients not randomly selected.
- Capacity for multiple randomised controlled trials over time within the cohort simultaneously.
CONSENT
For men who are participating in the cmRCT there are two points of consent:
POINT OF CONSENT ONE
At Point of Consent One men who are referred for investigation of prostate cancer will be asked two questions. The first question relates to whether they are willing to join the cohort and have data collected directly from them over time on a regular basis. This data will include health-related quality-of-life data (at recruitment, 0-6, 6, 12, 18 \& 24 months post recruitment), linkage to their medical records so that researchers can know what happens to them over time, and access to other data about them held on national health registry databases. Also, at point of consent one, prospective participants will be asked (second question) whether they agree to being randomly selected in the future to interventions or changes in management in order to compare to standard care. It will be explained that this second invitation will be on a random basis. In other words, everyone eligible within the cohort will have the same chance of being randomly selected. The patient would still have the option of saying 'no' after the random selection when they are approached.
POINT OF CONSENT TWO
The second point of consent is the invitation to undergo an intervention or change in management that the research team wishes to compare to standard care. Participants will have already agreed to the possibility of being invited to undergo intervention at Point of Consent One (i.e. enrolment into the cmRCT). The participant will have been randomly selected from amongst all the eligible men for the given intervention from within the large cmRCT cohort prior to being approached by the trial team. Then, the trial team will approach the participant and invite him to undergo the intervention. This will entail a comprehensive consent process that pertains directly to the intervention being proposed in a patient-centred manner. The participant can agree or refuse to undergo the intervention. If he does not wish to undergo the treatment he will continue under follow-up in PROSPECT.
Participants undergoing intervention will continue to have follow-up in the same manner as men who have not been randomised from within the cohort and thus provide outcome data to form the control arm. Comparison of the outcomes of those men who underwent trial intervention against those who did not will allow us to analyse the effectiveness of the intervention in as robust a manner as possible given that the key feature of randomisation when creating the control vs. the intervention arms has been preserved. As such, the control arm of the cmRCT will be similar to the intervention arm in all features, known and unknown, except the intervention of interest. This will allow for the maintenance of epistemological superiority of the data produced for evaluating new tests or treatments whilst getting to this point in a way that might be more acceptable to patients and therefore more likely to be successful and efficient for researchers.
The second stage of PROSPECT will be to investigate and evaluate in a similarly careful manner the feasibility and acceptability of randomising men from the cohort of eligible men to interventions or changes in management that require evaluation, following submission to REC. As part of the cmRCT design, these men randomly selected are re-approached and invited to consider undergoing the intervention of interest. Patients who are randomly allocated to the control arm will also receive standard of care, and are not informed about their participation in the control arm. This additional consent will be obtained at the time of consent for the cohort study.
STUDY SETTING AND POPULATION
All men referred for investigation of prostate cancer. The inclusion criteria for this cohort is deliberately broad.
Study design
- Observational model
- Other
- Time perspective
- Prospective
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- Male only
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- All men referred for investigation of prostate cancer
Key inclusion criteria (4 listed)
- Men aged 18 years old and over who are referred for investigations for urinary symptoms or elevated serum prostate specific antigen (PSA) levels or other risk factors for possible prostate malignancy.
- An understanding of the English language sufficient to understand written and verbal information about the trial and consent process.
- Estimated life expectancy of 5 years or more.
- Signed informed consent.
Key exclusion criteria (1 listed)
- 1. Men who are unable to give informed consent.
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
Number of Men Who Consented to Inclusion in PROSPECT Study Out of Total Number of Patients Approached
Time frame: from baseline to 23 months
Number of men who consented to inclusion in PROSPECT Study out of total number of patients approached at the original point of contact by the research team.
Number of Participants Approached for the Study From the Number of Patients Referred to the Study Team by Other Participating Centres
Time frame: from baseline to 23 months
Evaluation of the number of men approached to enter the PROSPECT Study from the number of men referred to the participating centres for investigation of prostate cancer.
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on the Quality of Life (EQ5D-5L)
Time frame: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants who complete a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (EQ5D-5L) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (EPIC-26)
Time frame: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants who completed a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (EPIC-26) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (IPSS)
Time frame: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants who complete a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (IPSS) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT.
Number of Participants Who Complete a Questionnaire on Quality of Life (IIEF-15)
Time frame: Questionnaire was completed at baseline - 0 months, visit 1 - 6 months, visit 2 -12 months and visit 3 -18 months.
Number of Participants who completed a given standard Quality of Life Questionnaire (IIEF-15) at the point at which they consent to inclusion into PROSPECT. (Baseline Visit)
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 18 Jun 2025.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Derived from this study: PubMed 35963650Peters M, Eldred-Evans D, Kurver P, Falagario UG, Connor MJ, Shah TT, Verhoeff JJC, Taimen P, Aronen HJ, Knaapila J, Montoya Perez I, Ettala O, Stabile A, Gandaglia G, Fossati N, Martini A, Cucchiara V, Briganti A, Lantz A, Picker W, Haug ES, Nordstrom T, Tanaka MB, Reddy D, Bass E, van Rossum PSN, Wong K, Tam H, Winkler M, Gordon S, Qazi H, Bostrom PJ, Jambor I, Ahmed HU. Predicting the Need for Biopsy to Detect Clinically Significant Prostate Cancer in Patients with a Magnetic Resonance Imaging-detected Prostate Imaging Reporting and Data System/Likert >/=3 Lesion: Development and Multinational External Validation of the Imperial Rapid Access to Prostate Imaging and Diagnosis Risk Score. Eur Urol. 2022 Nov;82(5):559-568. doi: 10.1016/j.eururo.2022.07.022. Epub 2022 Aug 11.
Related trials for Prostate Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
The BALANCE Study: BlAck and Mixed Men's Lived Experience With Prostate cANCEr-Diversity in Prostate Cancer PROMS Study
Prostate Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
Advanced Radiotherapy (ART) in Prostate Cancer (PROST-ART)
Prostate Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
The Investigation of New Biological Markers for Prostate Cancer Diagnosis and Management in Chinese Population
Prostate Cancer
Not yet recruitingPhase 2
Multitargeted Recombinant Ad5 PSA/MUC-1/Brachyury-Based Immunotherapy (TriAdeno) Vaccine With IL-15 Superagonist N-803 in Participants With Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer Undergoing Active Surveillance
Adenocarcinoma, Prostate Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
The PROFILE Study: Germline Genetic Profiling: Correlation With Targeted Prostate Cancer Screening and Treatment
Prostate Cancer, Prostate Biopsy
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.
Hashim Ahmed principal investigator
Imperial College London
3 sites in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Prostate Cancer and Non-metastatic Prostate Cancer, run by Imperial College London at 3 sites in United Kingdom.
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 4 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 18 Jun 2025. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 3 sites in United Kingdom. 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 18 Jun 2025). 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?
Number of Men Who Consented to Inclusion in PROSPECT Study Out of Total Number of Patients Approached (time frame: from baseline to 23 months). The study lists 6 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 NCT04400656, 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 18 Jun 2025.