Patient PreferencePathosNCT04925154
Tradeoffs in Patient Decision Making About Rectal Cancer Treatment: Benefits Compared to Quality Of Life.
An observational study of Patient Preference, run by Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital at 1 site in Canada.
Trial summary
This study is aiming to look into patients' treatment preferences and their socio economic background as well as the exploration of thought processes leading to these preferences. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Ages 18 years and olderHealthy volunteers can take part
- Conditions the study is for
- Patient Preference
- What is being tested?
- The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.
- Type of treatment
- Lifestyle or therapy programme
- How many people
- 192 participants
- Where
- 1 siteCanada
- Study dates
- 13 Dec 2021to 1 Jan 2028
- How long will I take part?
- 3 Weeks
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- Not yet: the study is under way
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
Study population: This study will evaluate 192 participants: * 14 physicians (group A) * 178 patients (group B)
Who may be able to join
- Group A
- New rectal cancer patient
- Operable patients
- Capable adults older than 18 years of age
- Capacity to sign a consent form
- Capacity to answer questionnaires on an online platform Group B
Show all 9Show fewer
- Treating physician specialists
- Capacity to sign a consent form
- Capacity to answer questionnaires on an online platform
Who cannot join
- Group A:
- Patient unable to sign a consent form
- Patients with metastasis
- Recurrent tumours
- Inability to answer questionnaires on an online platform
- Inability to communicate in french or english
Show all 9Show fewer
- Group B:
- Participant unable to sign a consent form
- Inability to answer questionnaires on an online platform
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country. Contact the study team or a site near you to ask about taking part.
Canada1 site, 1 recruiting
- Recruiting
Jewish General Hospital
Montreal, Quebec, H3T 1E2
Té Vuong, MD, 514-340-8222 ext. 22073, te.vuong.med@ssss.gouv.qc.ca
About this study
Official title: PATHOS Tradeoffs in Patient Decision Making About Rectal Cancer Treatment: Benefits Compared to Quality Of Life.
This study is aiming to look into patients' treatment preferences and their socio economic background as well as the exploration of thought processes leading to these preferences. It will integrate, in two exploratory questionnaires, the three most common treatment schema (standard of care, non-operative management, surgery alone) all of which have been demonstrated efficacious.
Read the detailed description
The primary study objective is to evaluate socioeconomic and demographic factors involved in patients' / physicians treatment preferences. The secondary objective is to assess the tradeoff level between the benefits versus quality of life.
This study will evaluate 192 participants: 14 physicians (group A) and 178 patients (group B).
Participants with operable rectal cancer or health professionals will be screened for eligibility. Subsequently, these participants will be offered to participate in this pilot study and provided a consent form. When a participant has consented to participate, he/she will be provided with a first questionnaire (socio-demographic characteristics, some clinical data and medical baseline information as well as details about their current knowledge about treatments).
An informational brochure will be given after answering the first questionnaire describing different treatment regimens, treatment duration, potential side effects and oncologic outcomes.
A second questionnaire will be provided (evaluating patients treatment preferences and tradeoff).
The consent form, brochure and questionnaires will be available only in an electronic format (Microsoft Form).
- Conditions
- Patient Preference
- Being tested
- The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.
- Keywords
- Colorectal cancer, Treatment preferences
- Medical subject headings
- Patient Preference, Colorectal Neoplasms
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.Behavioural
The information brochure will be given to both groups at the same time at 2-3 weeks after the first consultation (patients group) or after answering the first questionnaire (physicians group).
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| Group A: Patients | Recruitment for this group will take place at either the radiation-oncology department or at the colorectal surgery department, at the time of consultation or at the time of diagnosis, before the treatment setting. Once clinical staging is available, the surgeon and/or radiation-oncologist and/or research assistant should identify eligible patients. Patients that comply with selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion) will be approached by a research team member. For those patients interested in participating, the e-link to the consent form for this group will be sent by email. Once a patient decides to sign the consent form, the link for the questionnaire Q1 will be sent by email. Receives: Behavioral: The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire. | |
| Group B: Physicians | Health professionals will be approached by the research team. The study aim will be explained, and participants that agree to participate will be provided an e-link to consent for this group. Once the health care participant decides to sign the consent form, the link for the questionnaire Q1 will be sent by email. Receives: Behavioral: The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire. |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Socio-economic and demographic characteristics
The primary study objective is to evaluate socioeconomic and demographic factors involved in patients' / physicians treatment preferences. This will be evaluated with the first questionnaire given at the time of the first consultation or when first approached by a research team member.
Measured: 1 day
Secondary outcomes (1)
Tradeoff level
The second objective is to assess the tradeoff level between the benefits versus quality of life. This will be evaluated with the second questionnaire given 2-3 weeks after the first consultation or after answering the first questionnaire.
Measured: 1 day
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted14 Jun 2021
- Study start13 Dec 2021
- Primary completion1 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion1 Jan 2028 (estimated)
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (30)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Patient PreferenceStudies 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
- Observational
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Other
- Enrolment
- 192 participants (estimated)
- Target duration
- 3 Weeks
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital
- Sponsor type
- University, hospital or other
- Responsible party
- Principal investigator, Dr. Te Vuong, Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital
- Investigators
- Té Vuong, Principal investigator, Lady Davis Institute - JGH
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04925154
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- 2021-2517
- Acronym
- Pathos
- Status last verified
- May 2025
- First submitted
- 7 Jun 2021
- Last updated
- 14 May 2026
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- No
- FDA-regulated drug
- No
- FDA-regulated device
- No
- Individual data sharing
- Undecided
Publications
Pieterse AH, Kunneman M, van den Hout WB, Baas-Thijssen M, Geijsen ED, Ceha HM, Muller KM, van der Linden YM, Marijnen CAM, Stiggelbout AM. Patient explicit consideration of tradeoffs in decision making about rectal cancer treatment: benefits for decision process and quality of life. Acta Oncol. 2019 Jul;58(7):1069-1076. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2019.1594363. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
PubMed 30971150Saclarides TJ. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2015 Sep;28(3):165-75. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562889.
PubMed 26491409Maggiori L, Panis Y. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for T1 rectal cancer. Acta Chir Iugosl. 2012;59(2):87-90. doi: 10.2298/aci1202087m.
PubMed 23373364Cunningham C. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2014;203:31-8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-08060-4_4.
PubMed 25102997Habr-Gama A, Sabbaga J, Gama-Rodrigues J, Sao Juliao GP, Proscurshim I, Bailao Aguilar P, Nadalin W, Perez RO. Watch and wait approach following extended neoadjuvant chemoradiation for distal rectal cancer: are we getting closer to anal cancer management? Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Oct;56(10):1109-17. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a25c4e.
PubMed 24022527Garant A, Magnan S, Devic S, Martin AG, Boutros M, Vasilevsky CA, Ferland S, Bujold A, DesGroseilliers S, Sebajang H, Richard C, Vuong T. Image Guided Adaptive Endorectal Brachytherapy in the Nonoperative Management of Patients With Rectal Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Dec 1;105(5):1005-1011. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.08.042. Epub 2019 Aug 30.
PubMed 31476417van der Valk MJM, Marijnen CAM, van Etten B, Dijkstra EA, Hilling DE, Kranenbarg EM, Putter H, Roodvoets AGH, Bahadoer RR, Fokstuen T, Ten Tije AJ, Capdevila J, Hendriks MP, Edhemovic I, Cervantes AMR, de Groot DJA, Nilsson PJ, Glimelius B, van de Velde CJH, Hospers GAP; Collaborative investigators. Compliance and tolerability of short-course radiotherapy followed by preoperative chemotherapy and surgery for high-risk rectal cancer - Results of the international randomized RAPIDO-trial. Radiother Oncol. 2020 Jun;147:75-83. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.03.011. Epub 2020 Mar 30.
PubMed 32240909van der Valk MJM, van der Sande ME, Toebes RE, Breukink SO, Broker MEE, Doornebosch PG, Maliko N, Neijenhuis PA, Marinelli AWKS, Peters FP, Peeters KCMJ, Beets GL, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Hilling DE. Importance of patient reported and clinical outcomes for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and their treating physicians. Do clinicians know what patients want? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020 Sep;46(9):1634-1641. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.04.014. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
PubMed 32336626Kannan S, Seo J, Riggs KR, Geller G, Boss EF, Berger ZD. Surgeons' Views on Shared Decision-Making. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2020 Jan 27;7(1):8-18. eCollection 2020 Winter.
PubMed 32002443Bossema ER, Marijnen CA, Baas-Thijssen MC, van de Velde CJ, Stiggelbout AM. Evaluation of the treatment tradeoff method in rectal cancer patients: is surgery preference related to outcome utilities? Med Decis Making. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(6):888-98. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08317013. Epub 2008 Jun 2.
PubMed 18519887Smith SK, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010 Oct 26;341:c5370. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5370.
PubMed 20978060Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ. 2000 Jun 3;320(7248):1530-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1530. No abstract available.
PubMed 10834905Pieterse AH, Berkers F, Baas-Thijssen MC, Marijnen CA, Stiggelbout AM. Adaptive Conjoint Analysis as individual preference assessment tool: feasibility through the internet and reliability of preferences. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Feb;78(2):224-33. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.05.020. Epub 2009 Jul 5.
PubMed 19581069Pieterse AH, Stiggelbout AM, Marijnen CA. Methodologic evaluation of adaptive conjoint analysis to assess patient preferences: an application in oncology. Health Expect. 2010 Dec;13(4):392-405. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00595.x.
PubMed 20550594ANZGOG and PORTEC Group; Blinman P, Mileshkin L, Khaw P, Goss G, Johnson C, Capp A, Brooks S, Wain G, Kolodziej I, Veillard AS, O'Connell R, Creutzberg CL, Stockler MR. Patients' and clinicians' preferences for adjuvant chemotherapy in endometrial cancer: an ANZGOG substudy of the PORTEC-3 intergroup randomised trial. Br J Cancer. 2016 Nov 8;115(10):1179-1185. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2016.323. Epub 2016 Oct 20.
PubMed 27764842
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 14 May 2026. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- PATHOS Tradeoffs in Patient Decision Making About Rectal Cancer Treatment: Benefits Compared to Quality Of Life.
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT04925154
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- Pathos / 2021-2517
- Conditions
- Patient Preference
- Keywords
- Colorectal cancer, Treatment preferences
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Recruiting
- Enrolment
- 192 participants (estimated)
- Lead sponsor
- Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General HospitalUniversity, hospital or other
- Study start
- 13 Dec 2021 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 1 Dec 2027 (estimated)
- Study completion
- 1 Jan 2028 (estimated)
- First posted
- 14 Jun 2021 (actual)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This study is aiming to look into patients' treatment preferences and their socio economic background as well as the exploration of thought processes leading to these preferences. It will integrate, in two exploratory questionnaires, the three most common treatment schema (standard of care, non-operative management, surgery alone) all of which have been demonstrated efficacious.
Detailed description
The primary study objective is to evaluate socioeconomic and demographic factors involved in patients' / physicians treatment preferences. The secondary objective is to assess the tradeoff level between the benefits versus quality of life.
This study will evaluate 192 participants: 14 physicians (group A) and 178 patients (group B).
Participants with operable rectal cancer or health professionals will be screened for eligibility. Subsequently, these participants will be offered to participate in this pilot study and provided a consent form. When a participant has consented to participate, he/she will be provided with a first questionnaire (socio-demographic characteristics, some clinical data and medical baseline information as well as details about their current knowledge about treatments).
An informational brochure will be given after answering the first questionnaire describing different treatment regimens, treatment duration, potential side effects and oncologic outcomes.
A second questionnaire will be provided (evaluating patients treatment preferences and tradeoff).
The consent form, brochure and questionnaires will be available only in an electronic format (Microsoft Form).
Study design
- Observational model
- Case-control
- Time perspective
- Other
- Target follow-up
- 3 Weeks
- Number of arms
- 2
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| Group A: Patients | – | Behavioral: The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.Recruitment for this group will take place at either the radiation-oncology department or at the colorectal surgery department, at the time of consultation or at the time of diagnosis, before the treatment setting. Once clinical staging is available, the surgeon and/or radiation-oncologist and/or research assistant should identify eligible patients. Patients that comply with selection criteria (inclusion/exclusion) will be approached by a research team member. For those patients interested in participating, the e-link to the consent form for this group will be sent by email. Once a patient decides to sign the consent form, the link for the questionnaire Q1 will be sent by email. |
| Group B: Physicians | – | Behavioral: The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.Health professionals will be approached by the research team. The study aim will be explained, and participants that agree to participate will be provided an e-link to consent for this group. Once the health care participant decides to sign the consent form, the link for the questionnaire Q1 will be sent by email. |
Who may qualify
- Ages
- 18 years and older
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Accepted
- Age groups
- Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- This study will evaluate 192 participants: * 14 physicians (group A) * 178 patients (group B)
Key inclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Group A
- New rectal cancer patient
- Operable patients
- Capable adults older than 18 years of age
- Capacity to sign a consent form
Key exclusion criteria (9 listed)
- Patient unable to sign a consent form
- Patients with metastasis
- Recurrent tumours
- Inability to answer questionnaires on an online platform
- Inability to communicate in french or english
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 |
|---|---|---|
| The only intervention will be the information brochure that will be given after the first questionnaire.The information brochure will be given to both groups at the same time at 2-3 weeks after the first consultation (patients group) or after answering the first questionnaire (physicians group). | Behavioural | Group A: Patients, Group B: Physicians |
Primary outcome
Socio-economic and demographic characteristics
Time frame: 1 day
The primary study objective is to evaluate socioeconomic and demographic factors involved in patients' / physicians treatment preferences. This will be evaluated with the first questionnaire given at the time of the first consultation or when first approached by a research team member.
1 secondary outcome
Tradeoff level
Time frame: 1 day
Results and safety
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 14 May 2026.
- Background: PubMed 30971150Pieterse AH, Kunneman M, van den Hout WB, Baas-Thijssen M, Geijsen ED, Ceha HM, Muller KM, van der Linden YM, Marijnen CAM, Stiggelbout AM. Patient explicit consideration of tradeoffs in decision making about rectal cancer treatment: benefits for decision process and quality of life. Acta Oncol. 2019 Jul;58(7):1069-1076. doi: 10.1080/0284186X.2019.1594363. Epub 2019 Apr 11.
- Background: PubMed 26491409Saclarides TJ. Transanal Endoscopic Microsurgery. Clin Colon Rectal Surg. 2015 Sep;28(3):165-75. doi: 10.1055/s-0035-1562889.
- Background: PubMed 23373364Maggiori L, Panis Y. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery (TEM) for T1 rectal cancer. Acta Chir Iugosl. 2012;59(2):87-90. doi: 10.2298/aci1202087m.
- Background: PubMed 25102997Cunningham C. Transanal endoscopic microsurgery. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2014;203:31-8. doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-08060-4_4.
- Background: PubMed 24022527Habr-Gama A, Sabbaga J, Gama-Rodrigues J, Sao Juliao GP, Proscurshim I, Bailao Aguilar P, Nadalin W, Perez RO. Watch and wait approach following extended neoadjuvant chemoradiation for distal rectal cancer: are we getting closer to anal cancer management? Dis Colon Rectum. 2013 Oct;56(10):1109-17. doi: 10.1097/DCR.0b013e3182a25c4e.
- Background: PubMed 31476417Garant A, Magnan S, Devic S, Martin AG, Boutros M, Vasilevsky CA, Ferland S, Bujold A, DesGroseilliers S, Sebajang H, Richard C, Vuong T. Image Guided Adaptive Endorectal Brachytherapy in the Nonoperative Management of Patients With Rectal Cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019 Dec 1;105(5):1005-1011. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.08.042. Epub 2019 Aug 30.
- Background: PubMed 32240909van der Valk MJM, Marijnen CAM, van Etten B, Dijkstra EA, Hilling DE, Kranenbarg EM, Putter H, Roodvoets AGH, Bahadoer RR, Fokstuen T, Ten Tije AJ, Capdevila J, Hendriks MP, Edhemovic I, Cervantes AMR, de Groot DJA, Nilsson PJ, Glimelius B, van de Velde CJH, Hospers GAP; Collaborative investigators. Compliance and tolerability of short-course radiotherapy followed by preoperative chemotherapy and surgery for high-risk rectal cancer - Results of the international randomized RAPIDO-trial. Radiother Oncol. 2020 Jun;147:75-83. doi: 10.1016/j.radonc.2020.03.011. Epub 2020 Mar 30.
- Background: PubMed 32336626van der Valk MJM, van der Sande ME, Toebes RE, Breukink SO, Broker MEE, Doornebosch PG, Maliko N, Neijenhuis PA, Marinelli AWKS, Peters FP, Peeters KCMJ, Beets GL, Marang-van de Mheen PJ, Hilling DE. Importance of patient reported and clinical outcomes for patients with locally advanced rectal cancer and their treating physicians. Do clinicians know what patients want? Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020 Sep;46(9):1634-1641. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.04.014. Epub 2020 Apr 15.
- Background: PubMed 32002443Kannan S, Seo J, Riggs KR, Geller G, Boss EF, Berger ZD. Surgeons' Views on Shared Decision-Making. J Patient Cent Res Rev. 2020 Jan 27;7(1):8-18. eCollection 2020 Winter.
- Background: PubMed 18519887Bossema ER, Marijnen CA, Baas-Thijssen MC, van de Velde CJ, Stiggelbout AM. Evaluation of the treatment tradeoff method in rectal cancer patients: is surgery preference related to outcome utilities? Med Decis Making. 2008 Nov-Dec;28(6):888-98. doi: 10.1177/0272989X08317013. Epub 2008 Jun 2.
- Background: PubMed 20978060Smith SK, Trevena L, Simpson JM, Barratt A, Nutbeam D, McCaffery KJ. A decision aid to support informed choices about bowel cancer screening among adults with low education: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2010 Oct 26;341:c5370. doi: 10.1136/bmj.c5370.
- Background: PubMed 10834905Ryan M, Farrar S. Using conjoint analysis to elicit preferences for health care. BMJ. 2000 Jun 3;320(7248):1530-3. doi: 10.1136/bmj.320.7248.1530. No abstract available.
- Individual participant dataSharing planned: Undecided
Related trials for Patient Preference
Enrolling by invitationObservational study
Liver Transplantation Versus Conventional Medical Therapy for Low-Grade GEP-NET With Liver Metastases
Neuroendocrine Tumors
RecruitingObservational study
Patient Needs and Preferences for NSCL Cancer Treatment Monitoring
Lung Cancer (NSCLC)
Recruiting
Evaluating the Feasibility of Prehabilitation Delivery Models for Patients Preparing for Gynecologic Cancer Surgery
Prehabilitation, Preoperative Aerobic Training
Not yet recruiting
Radical CystEctomy or RaDio-chEMotherapy as Preferred Treatment for invasivE blaDder Cancer
Muscle Invasive Bladder Cancer
RecruitingObservational study
PERCE-MUCO: Perceptions and Expectations of People With Cystic Fibrosis Regarding a Change in Treatment
Cystic Fibrosis (CF)
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.
Té Vuong principal investigator
Lady Davis Institute - JGH
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Patient Preference, run by Sir Mortimer B. Davis - Jewish General Hospital at 1 site in Canada.
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 9 inclusion and 9 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: looking for participants now, as of the sponsor's last update on 14 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 Canada. 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?
This study is still under way. Results are not available in the source record yet.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
Contact Emma Starr, BHSc (514-340-8222 ext. 28443, emma.starr.ccomtl@ssss.gouv.qc.ca), or a site near the patient. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Socio-economic and demographic characteristics (time frame: 1 day). 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 NCT04925154, which also lists 30 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 14 May 2026.