Upper Gastrointestinal SymptomsNCT04605302
Comparative Study of MCCE With/Without Tether vs Conventional Upper Endoscopy in Patients With Upper Abdominal Symptoms
A study testing MCC/MCC-T and Standard gastroscopy in people with Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms, run by AnX Robotica Corp. at 1 site in United States.
Trial summary
A prospective single blinded, tandem study, comparing a magnetically controlled capsule with or without a tether (MCC or MCC-T) with conventional upper endoscopy for the diagnosis of patients with upper abdominal symptoms. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 to 75 yearsHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms
- What is being tested?
- MCC/MCC-T and Standard gastroscopy
- Type of treatment
- Pill or oral medicine, Medical device
- Could I receive a placebo?
- No, everyone receives an active treatment
- How many people
- 27 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited States
- Study dates
- 10 Feb 2021to 30 Mar 2023
- 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 to 75 years
- All sexes
- Healthy volunteers accepted
- Adult, Older adult
Who may be able to join
- Patient is able to provide informed consent
- Patient has appropriate indications for EGD including symptoms of, but not limited to upper abdominal pain, acid reflux, heartburn, iron deficiency anemia, weight loss, bloating, belching, nausea, vomiting and atypical chest pain.
Who cannot join
- Patient with dysphagia.
- Patient with previous intestinal surgery.
- Patient with Crohn's disease or other potential obstructive conditions, unless there is a recent CTE, MRE or patency capsule performed to exclude an obstructive lesion that may retain the capsule.
- Female patient who is pregnant.
- Patient with implanted medical device that would be potentially affected by magnets or radiofrequency emissions (e.g., pacemakers, implanted cardiac defibrillators).
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
United States1 site
University of Massachusetts Medical School
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01655
About this study
Official title: A Prospective Single Blinded, Pilot Study, Comparing a Magnetically Controlled Capsule With or Without a Tether (MCC or MCC-T) With Conventional Upper Endoscopy for the Diagnosis of Patients With Upper Abdominal Symptoms
A prospective single blinded, tandem study, comparing a magnetically controlled capsule with or without a tether (MCC or MCC-T) with conventional upper endoscopy for the diagnosis of patients with upper abdominal symptoms.
Read the detailed description
In the US patients commonly undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for upper abdominal symptoms to try to resolve whether they have gastroesophageal reflux disease or functional dyspepsia, if they are older than the age of 60 with symptoms, or have alarm symptoms such as unexplained weight loss, persistent nausea and vomiting or if they have symptoms that are refractory to acid suppression therapy. Given the increasing burden of digestive disease in the US, the use of EGD is increasing in volume nationwide. EGD usually requires either conscious sedation or monitored anesthesia sedation, which has put an additional cost burden on the healthcare system. Since MCC or MCC-T does not require sedation, it offers an attractive option for both patients and clinicians alike.
The aim of this study is to compare in the same patient the accuracy of the MCC and MCC-T and EGD in patients presenting with upper abdominal symptoms.
- Conditions
- Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms
- Being tested
- MCC/MCC-T, Standard gastroscopy
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
MCC/MCC-TDevice
Also called Magnetic controlled capsule endoscopy with/without tether
Magnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCC), with or without tether, is used to visualize the upper gastrointestinal tract
Standard gastroscopyDevice
Also called EGD
Diagnostic endoscopic procedure that visualizes the upper part of the gastrointestinal tract down to the duodenum
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Single Arm Tandem Study | Experimental | Patients are assigned to swallow a magnetically controlled capsule first then undergo standard gastroscopy Receives: Device: MCC/MCC-T; Device: Standard gastroscopy |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Compare Total Number of Lesions Identified Via MCCE Versus EGD
A count of the cumulative total number of lesions identified by the MCCE procedure versus a count of the cumulative total number of lesions identified by the EGD procedure.
Measured: Day of EGD procedure
Number of Adverse Events
Occurrence and severity of adverse event related to MCCE procedure versus EGD procedure. Outcomes noted in AE/SAE sections. Adverse Events were NOT collected in the Healthy Volunteer arm.
Measured: 24-72 hour follow up phone call post EGD procedure
Secondary outcomes (2)
Participant Satisfaction Score With MCCE Procedure Versus EGD Procedure
Participant acceptance of MCCE versus EGD (units on a scale, scale of 1 to 10; when 1 is the lowest and 10 is the highest score)
Measured: 24-72 hour follow up phone call post EGD procedure
To Compare Rate of Complete Examination for the MCC and EGD Procedures
Total count of participants who were able to complete their MCC procedure, compared to a total count of participants able to complete their EGD procedure.
Measured: Day of procedure
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted28 Oct 2020
- Study start10 Feb 2021
- Primary completion30 Jun 2021
- Study completion30 Mar 2023
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.
- Other trials for Upper Gastrointestinal SymptomsStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- 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
- Model description
- Tandem study
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Enrolment
- 27 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- AnX Robotica Corp.
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- David R Cave, MD, PhD, Principal investigator, University of Massachusetts, Worcester
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04605302
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- UMASS-01
- Status last verified
- May 2026
- First submitted
- 8 Oct 2020
- Last updated
- 27 May 2026
- Results posted
- Yes, on ClinicalTrials.gov
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- Yes
- Individual data sharing
- No
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 27 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- A Prospective Single Blinded, Pilot Study, Comparing a Magnetically Controlled Capsule With or Without a Tether (MCC or MCC-T) With Conventional Upper Endoscopy for the Diagnosis of Patients With Upper Abdominal Symptoms
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04605302
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- UMASS-01
- Conditions
- Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms
- Study type
- Interventional
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 27 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- AnX Robotica Corp.Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 10 Feb 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Mar 2023 (actual)
- First posted
- 28 Oct 2020 (actual)
- Results
- Posted 27 May 2026
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
A prospective single blinded, tandem study, comparing a magnetically controlled capsule with or without a tether (MCC or MCC-T) with conventional upper endoscopy for the diagnosis of patients with upper abdominal symptoms.
Detailed description
In the US patients commonly undergo esophagogastroduodenoscopy (EGD) for upper abdominal symptoms to try to resolve whether they have gastroesophageal reflux disease or functional dyspepsia, if they are older than the age of 60 with symptoms, or have alarm symptoms such as unexplained weight loss, persistent nausea and vomiting or if they have symptoms that are refractory to acid suppression therapy. Given the increasing burden of digestive disease in the US, the use of EGD is increasing in volume nationwide. EGD usually requires either conscious sedation or monitored anesthesia sedation, which has put an additional cost burden on the healthcare system. Since MCC or MCC-T does not require sedation, it offers an attractive option for both patients and clinicians alike.
The aim of this study is to compare in the same patient the accuracy of the MCC and MCC-T and EGD in patients presenting with upper abdominal symptoms.
Study design
- Primary purpose
- Diagnosis
- Allocation
- Not applicable
- Intervention model
- Single group
- Masking
- None (open label)
- Number of arms
- 1
- Model description
- Tandem study
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Single Arm Tandem Study | Experimental | Device: MCC/MCC-T, Device: Standard gastroscopyPatients are assigned to swallow a magnetically controlled capsule first then undergo standard gastroscopy |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 to 75 years
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
Key inclusion criteria (2 listed)
- Patient is able to provide informed consent
- Patient has appropriate indications for EGD including symptoms of, but not limited to upper abdominal pain, acid reflux, heartburn, iron deficiency anemia, weight loss, bloating, belching, nausea, vomiting and atypical chest pain.
Key exclusion criteria (5 listed)
- Patient with dysphagia.
- Patient with previous intestinal surgery.
- Patient with Crohn's disease or other potential obstructive conditions, unless there is a recent CTE, MRE or patency capsule performed to exclude an obstructive lesion that may retain the capsule.
- Female patient who is pregnant.
- Patient with implanted medical device that would be potentially affected by magnets or radiofrequency emissions (e.g., pacemakers, implanted cardiac defibrillators).
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 |
|---|---|---|
| MCC/MCC-TAlso: Magnetic controlled capsule endoscopy with/without tetherMagnetically controlled capsule endoscopy (MCC), with or without tether, is used to visualize the upper gastrointestinal tract | Device | Single Arm Tandem Study |
| Standard gastroscopyAlso: EGDDiagnostic endoscopic procedure that visualizes the upper part of the gastrointestinal tract down to the duodenum | Device | Single Arm Tandem Study |
Primary outcome
Compare Total Number of Lesions Identified Via MCCE Versus EGD
Time frame: Day of EGD procedure
A count of the cumulative total number of lesions identified by the MCCE procedure versus a count of the cumulative total number of lesions identified by the EGD procedure.
Number of Adverse Events
Time frame: 24-72 hour follow up phone call post EGD procedure
Occurrence and severity of adverse event related to MCCE procedure versus EGD procedure. Outcomes noted in AE/SAE sections. Adverse Events were NOT collected in the Healthy Volunteer arm.
2 secondary outcomes
Participant Satisfaction Score With MCCE Procedure Versus EGD Procedure
Time frame: 24-72 hour follow up phone call post EGD procedure
To Compare Rate of Complete Examination for the MCC and EGD Procedures
Time frame: Day of procedure
Results and safety
Loading the posted results from ClinicalTrials.gov…
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 27 May 2026.
- Posted resultsParticipant flow, baseline, all outcome measures and adverse events.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: No
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.
David R Cave, MD, PhD principal investigator
University of Massachusetts, Worcester
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
A study testing MCC/MCC-T and Standard gastroscopy in people with Upper Gastrointestinal Symptoms, run by AnX Robotica Corp. 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 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 27 May 2026. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in 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 27 May 2026). 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?
Compare Total Number of Lesions Identified Via MCCE Versus EGD (time frame: Day of EGD procedure). The study lists 2 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
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 27 May 2026; AzTrials last refreshed its copy on 27 Oct 2026.