search
Back to results

To Compare Artificial Intelligence Software Aided Adenoma Detection in Screening Colonoscopies Versus Standard Colonoscopy Without Artificial Intelligence Software Assistance in Participants Between 45 and 75 Years of Age (AIDA)

Primary Purpose

Colorectal Adenoma, Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Adenocarcinoma

Status
Unknown status
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
United States
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Ultivision Artificial Intelligence Software
No Artificial Intelligence Software enhancement
Sponsored by
Docbot, Inc.
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional screening trial for Colorectal Adenoma focused on measuring screening colonoscopy, artificial intelligence, software as a medical device, adenoma detection rate, adenomas per endoscopy, mean adenomas per colonoscopy, colorectal cancer, medical device

Eligibility Criteria

45 Years - 75 Years (Adult, Older Adult)All SexesAccepts Healthy Volunteers

Primary Inclusion Criteria.

  1. Average risk asymptomatic subjects undergoing a first colonoscopy (screening) or screening colonoscopy at least 10 years after prior colonoscopy.
  2. Aged 45 years to aged 75 years at the time of enrollment.
  3. Capable of providing written informed consent and willing and able to adhere to all protocol requirements, and/or the subject's legally acceptable representative(s) capable of providing written informed consent.

Primary Exclusion Criteria.

  1. History of any colorectal cancer or colon adenomas.
  2. History of inflammatory bowel disease, including Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis.
  3. Family history of colon cancer or precancerous colon polyp in a first degree relative before age 50.
  4. Polyposis syndromes including Familial Adenomatous Polyposis, Cowden syndrome, Lynch syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, MUTYH Associated Polyposis, Familial Colorectal Cancer Type X.
  5. Surveillance, therapeutic, preoperative, or diagnostic colonoscopy.
  6. Colonoscopy for work-up of abdominal or pelvic symptoms including abdominal pain, flank pain, pelvic pain, subject report of altered stool, subject report of anemia within the past 12 months, subject report of gastrointestinal bleeding including bright red blood per rectum or tarry stools, constipation, diarrhea, subject reported history of abdominal or pelvic mass, subject report of unintentional weight loss.
  7. Workup or referral to diagnose or evaluate abnormal imaging of the abdomen or pelvis.
  8. Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test history.
  9. Severe co-mobordity, including end-stage cardiovascular, pulmonary, liver, or renal disease.
  10. History of colon resection, not including the appendix.
  11. Currently receiving a therapy not permitted during the trial, as defined in Section 8.3.
  12. Any issue that, in the opinion of the investigator, would render the subject unsuitable for participation in the trial.

Enrolled subjects will be eligible for Post-procedure Periods if their colonoscopy meets the following criteria:

  1. Adequate bowel preparation score per the Boston Bowel Preparation Scoring System (BBPS) > or equal to 2 in all colonic segments.
  2. Colonoscopies with successful cecal intubation.
  3. Colonoscopies with withdrawal times of at least 6 minutes.

Sites / Locations

  • Gastro HealthRecruiting
  • Precision Research InstituteRecruiting
  • Kansas City Veterans AdministrationRecruiting
  • Capital Digestive CareRecruiting
  • East Side EndoscopyRecruiting
  • Great Lakes Gastroenterology Research, LLC, Clinical Trials NetworkRecruiting
  • Verity Research Inc., Gastro HealthRecruiting
  • Gastrointestinal & Liver Specialists of Tidewater, PLLCRecruiting
  • Wisconsin GI AssociatesRecruiting

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

Active Comparator

Placebo Comparator

Arm Label

Ultivision AI Software enhanced screening colonoscopy

No AI enhancement screening colonoscopy

Arm Description

Ultivision Artificial Intelligence enhanced screening colonoscopies will be performed.

Screening colonoscopies without Artificial Intelligence enhancement will be performed.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Overall adenoma detection, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
The primary efficacy endpoint is the mean adenomas per colonoscopy procedure (MAP) detection, as defined by the protocol, with Ultivision AI software enhancement to screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Overall adenomas per extraction, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard hiigh definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
The primary safety endpoint is the adenomas per extraction per colonoscopy procedure (APE), as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus SHDWLC without AI.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Adenoma detection rate, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
The secondary efficacy endpoint is the adenoma detection rate (ADR) defined as the ratio of screening colonoscopies with at least one adenoma, as defined by the protocol, detected divided by the total number of screening SHDWLC performed with Ultivision AI versus screening SHDWLC performed without AI.

Full Information

First Posted
December 9, 2019
Last Updated
March 17, 2021
Sponsor
Docbot, Inc.
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT04196088
Brief Title
To Compare Artificial Intelligence Software Aided Adenoma Detection in Screening Colonoscopies Versus Standard Colonoscopy Without Artificial Intelligence Software Assistance in Participants Between 45 and 75 Years of Age
Acronym
AIDA
Official Title
AIDA: A Multicenter, Prospective, Randomized Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Clinical Efficacy and Safety of Artificial Intelligence (AI) Detection of Adenomas (AIDA) With Standard High Definition With Light in Screening Colonoscopy
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
March 2021
Overall Recruitment Status
Unknown status
Study Start Date
June 11, 2020 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
November 2021 (Anticipated)
Study Completion Date
December 2021 (Anticipated)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Docbot, Inc.

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
Yes
Device Product Not Approved or Cleared by U.S. FDA
Yes
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
The aim of this study is to assess the efficacy of Ultivision Artificial Intelligence (AI) Software in detecting adenomas in screening colonoscopy procedures. The safety of Ultivision AI Software will also be assessed. A subset of the subjects will enter a roll-in period for clinical trial safety assessment. The remainder of subjects who are eligible will enter the detection phase which comprises a screening colonoscopy procedure. In the detection phase, subjects will be randomized to a screening colonoscopy with Ultivision AI Software enhancement or without AI Software enhancement. The study will measure the mean adenomas per colonoscopy procedure, as defined by the protocol, detected while receiving either treatment option.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Colorectal Adenoma, Colorectal Polyp, Colorectal Adenocarcinoma, Colorectal SSA
Keywords
screening colonoscopy, artificial intelligence, software as a medical device, adenoma detection rate, adenomas per endoscopy, mean adenomas per colonoscopy, colorectal cancer, medical device

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Screening
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
ParticipantOutcomes Assessor
Masking Description
Triple (Participant, Pathologist, Outcomes Assessor)
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
978 (Anticipated)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
Ultivision AI Software enhanced screening colonoscopy
Arm Type
Active Comparator
Arm Description
Ultivision Artificial Intelligence enhanced screening colonoscopies will be performed.
Arm Title
No AI enhancement screening colonoscopy
Arm Type
Placebo Comparator
Arm Description
Screening colonoscopies without Artificial Intelligence enhancement will be performed.
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
Ultivision Artificial Intelligence Software
Intervention Description
Screening Colonoscopy
Intervention Type
Device
Intervention Name(s)
No Artificial Intelligence Software enhancement
Intervention Description
Screening Colonoscopy
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Overall adenoma detection, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
The primary efficacy endpoint is the mean adenomas per colonoscopy procedure (MAP) detection, as defined by the protocol, with Ultivision AI software enhancement to screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Overall adenomas per extraction, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard hiigh definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
The primary safety endpoint is the adenomas per extraction per colonoscopy procedure (APE), as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Adenoma detection rate, as defined by the protocol, using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
The secondary efficacy endpoint is the adenoma detection rate (ADR) defined as the ratio of screening colonoscopies with at least one adenoma, as defined by the protocol, detected divided by the total number of screening SHDWLC performed with Ultivision AI versus screening SHDWLC performed without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Other Pre-specified Outcome Measures:
Title
Advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR) using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Advanced adenoma detection rate (AADR) on SHDWLC using AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P) detection rate using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Sessile serrated adenoma/polyp (SSA/P) detection rate on SHDWLC using AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Polyp detection rate using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Polyp detection rate on SHDWLC using AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Flat versus polypoid lesion detection rate using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Flat versus polypoid lesion detection rate on SHDWLC AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Polyp location distribution using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Polyp location distribution on SHDWLC using AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Surveillance-irrelevant lesion (SIL) and surveillance-relevant lesion (SRL) detection rate using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Surveillance-irrelevant lesion (SIL) and surveillance-relevant lesion (SRL) detection rates using SHDWLC AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Post colonoscopy recommended surveillance follow-up interval using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Recommended surveillance interval after using SHDWLC AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year
Title
Colonoscope withdrawal time using Ultivision AI software in subjects undergoing screening standard high definition white light colonoscopy (SHDWLC) versus screening SHDWLC without AI.
Description
Colonoscope withdrawal time using SHDWLC AI versus SHDWLC without AI.
Time Frame
through study completion, an average of 1 year

10. Eligibility

Sex
All
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
45 Years
Maximum Age & Unit of Time
75 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
Eligibility Criteria
Primary Inclusion Criteria. Average risk asymptomatic subjects undergoing a first colonoscopy (screening) or screening colonoscopy at least 10 years after prior colonoscopy. Aged 45 years to aged 75 years at the time of enrollment. Capable of providing written informed consent and willing and able to adhere to all protocol requirements, and/or the subject's legally acceptable representative(s) capable of providing written informed consent. Primary Exclusion Criteria. History of any colorectal cancer or colon adenomas. History of inflammatory bowel disease, including Crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis. Family history of colon cancer or precancerous colon polyp in a first degree relative before age 50. Polyposis syndromes including Familial Adenomatous Polyposis, Cowden syndrome, Lynch syndrome, Peutz-Jeghers syndrome, MUTYH Associated Polyposis, Familial Colorectal Cancer Type X. Surveillance, therapeutic, preoperative, or diagnostic colonoscopy. Colonoscopy for work-up of abdominal or pelvic symptoms including abdominal pain, flank pain, pelvic pain, subject report of altered stool, subject report of anemia within the past 12 months, subject report of gastrointestinal bleeding including bright red blood per rectum or tarry stools, constipation, diarrhea, subject reported history of abdominal or pelvic mass, subject report of unintentional weight loss. Workup or referral to diagnose or evaluate abnormal imaging of the abdomen or pelvis. Positive Fecal Immunochemical Test history. Severe co-mobordity, including end-stage cardiovascular, pulmonary, liver, or renal disease. History of colon resection, not including the appendix. Currently receiving a therapy not permitted during the trial, as defined in Section 8.3. Any issue that, in the opinion of the investigator, would render the subject unsuitable for participation in the trial. Enrolled subjects will be eligible for Post-procedure Periods if their colonoscopy meets the following criteria: Adequate bowel preparation score per the Boston Bowel Preparation Scoring System (BBPS) > or equal to 2 in all colonic segments. Colonoscopies with successful cecal intubation. Colonoscopies with withdrawal times of at least 6 minutes.
Central Contact Person:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Efren Rael, MD
Phone
7179030979
Email
efren.rael@docbot.ai
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name or Official Title & Degree
Andrew Ninh
Phone
7147166674
Email
andrew.ninh@docbot.ai
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Efren Rael, MD
Organizational Affiliation
Docbot, Inc.
Official's Role
Study Director
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Gastro Health
City
Birmingham
State/Province
Alabama
ZIP/Postal Code
35209
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Robert Shaffer, MD
Email
robertshaffer@hotmail.com
Facility Name
Precision Research Institute
City
San Diego
State/Province
California
ZIP/Postal Code
92114
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Josie Summers
Phone
619-501-0371
Email
josie@prisandiego.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Cristina Ortega
Phone
619-501-0371
Email
Cristina@prisandiego.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Taddese T Desta, MD
Facility Name
Kansas City Veterans Administration
City
Kansas City
State/Province
Kansas
ZIP/Postal Code
66103
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Prateek Sharma, MD
Phone
816-861-4700
Email
psharma@kumc.edu
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
April Higbee
Email
april.higbee@va.gov
Facility Name
Capital Digestive Care
City
Chevy Chase
State/Province
Maryland
ZIP/Postal Code
20815
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Louis Y Korman, MD
Phone
240-737-0085
Email
louis.korman@capitaldigestivecare.com
Facility Name
East Side Endoscopy
City
New York
State/Province
New York
ZIP/Postal Code
10010
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Ira Breite, MD
Phone
212-375-1065
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Natalie Neri, RN
Phone
212-375-1065
Facility Name
Great Lakes Gastroenterology Research, LLC, Clinical Trials Network
City
Mentor
State/Province
Ohio
ZIP/Postal Code
44060
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Cortney Vazquez
Email
cvazquez@thectnx.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Keith Friedenberg, MD
Facility Name
Verity Research Inc., Gastro Health
City
Fairfax
State/Province
Virginia
ZIP/Postal Code
22031
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Dana Zahid
Phone
703-776-1795
Email
dzahid@gastrohealth.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Joon Lee
Phone
703-776-1795
Email
jlee@gastrohealth.com
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Bezawit Tekola, MD
Facility Name
Gastrointestinal & Liver Specialists of Tidewater, PLLC
City
Norfolk
State/Province
Virginia
ZIP/Postal Code
23502
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
David Johnson, MD
Email
dajevms@aol.com
Facility Name
Wisconsin GI Associates
City
Milwaukee
State/Province
Wisconsin
ZIP/Postal Code
53215
Country
United States
Individual Site Status
Recruiting
Facility Contact:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Nalini Guda, MD
Phone
414-908-6503
Email
nguda@wisc.edu

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
22356322
Citation
Zauber AG, Winawer SJ, O'Brien MJ, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, van Ballegooijen M, Hankey BF, Shi W, Bond JH, Schapiro M, Panish JF, Stewart ET, Waye JD. Colonoscopic polypectomy and long-term prevention of colorectal-cancer deaths. N Engl J Med. 2012 Feb 23;366(8):687-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1100370.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21200035
Citation
Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Seiler CM, Rickert A, Hoffmeister M. Protection from colorectal cancer after colonoscopy: a population-based, case-control study. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Jan 4;154(1):22-30. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-154-1-201101040-00004.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8247072
Citation
Winawer SJ, Zauber AG, Ho MN, O'Brien MJ, Gottlieb LS, Sternberg SS, Waye JD, Schapiro M, Bond JH, Panish JF, et al. Prevention of colorectal cancer by colonoscopic polypectomy. The National Polyp Study Workgroup. N Engl J Med. 1993 Dec 30;329(27):1977-81. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199312303292701.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25936449
Citation
Shergill AK, Conners EE, McQuaid KR, Epstein S, Ryan JC, Shah JN, Inadomi J, Somsouk M. Protective association of colonoscopy against proximal and distal colon cancer and patterns in interval cancer. Gastrointest Endosc. 2015 Sep;82(3):529-37.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2015.01.053. Epub 2015 May 1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19075198
Citation
Baxter NN, Goldwasser MA, Paszat LF, Saskin R, Urbach DR, Rabeneck L. Association of colonoscopy and death from colorectal cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2009 Jan 6;150(1):1-8. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-150-1-200901060-00306. Epub 2008 Dec 15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22826281
Citation
Brenner H, Chang-Claude J, Rickert A, Seiler CM, Hoffmeister M. Risk of colorectal cancer after detection and removal of adenomas at colonoscopy: population-based case-control study. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Aug 20;30(24):2969-76. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2011.41.3377. Epub 2012 Jul 23.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20600026
Citation
Singh H, Nugent Z, Demers AA, Kliewer EV, Mahmud SM, Bernstein CN. The reduction in colorectal cancer mortality after colonoscopy varies by site of the cancer. Gastroenterology. 2010 Oct;139(4):1128-37. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2010.06.052. Epub 2010 Jun 20.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24693890
Citation
Corley DA, Jensen CD, Marks AR, Zhao WK, Lee JK, Doubeni CA, Zauber AG, de Boer J, Fireman BH, Schottinger JE, Quinn VP, Ghai NR, Levin TR, Quesenberry CP. Adenoma detection rate and risk of colorectal cancer and death. N Engl J Med. 2014 Apr 3;370(14):1298-306. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1309086.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23375528
Citation
Coe SG, Wallace MB. Assessment of adenoma detection rate benchmarks in women versus men. Gastrointest Endosc. 2013 Apr;77(4):631-5. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2012.12.001. Epub 2013 Feb 1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26553207
Citation
Adler J, Robertson DJ. Interval Colorectal Cancer After Colonoscopy: Exploring Explanations and Solutions. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Dec;110(12):1657-64; quiz 1665. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2015.365. Epub 2015 Nov 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20463339
Citation
Kaminski MF, Regula J, Kraszewska E, Polkowski M, Wojciechowska U, Didkowska J, Zwierko M, Rupinski M, Nowacki MP, Butruk E. Quality indicators for colonoscopy and the risk of interval cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010 May 13;362(19):1795-803. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0907667.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23744612
Citation
le Clercq CM, Bouwens MW, Rondagh EJ, Bakker CM, Keulen ET, de Ridder RJ, Winkens B, Masclee AA, Sanduleanu S. Postcolonoscopy colorectal cancers are preventable: a population-based study. Gut. 2014 Jun;63(6):957-63. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2013-304880. Epub 2013 Jun 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22375173
Citation
Ahn SB, Han DS, Bae JH, Byun TJ, Kim JP, Eun CS. The Miss Rate for Colorectal Adenoma Determined by Quality-Adjusted, Back-to-Back Colonoscopies. Gut Liver. 2012 Jan;6(1):64-70. doi: 10.5009/gnl.2012.6.1.64. Epub 2012 Jan 12.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16454841
Citation
van Rijn JC, Reitsma JB, Stoker J, Bossuyt PM, van Deventer SJ, Dekker E. Polyp miss rate determined by tandem colonoscopy: a systematic review. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Feb;101(2):343-50. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00390.x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17227527
Citation
Rex DK. Maximizing detection of adenomas and cancers during colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2006 Dec;101(12):2866-77. doi: 10.1111/j.1572-0241.2006.00905.x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23381064
Citation
Aslanian HR, Shieh FK, Chan FW, Ciarleglio MM, Deng Y, Rogart JN, Jamidar PA, Siddiqui UD. Nurse observation during colonoscopy increases polyp detection: a randomized prospective study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2013 Feb;108(2):166-72. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2012.237.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21889137
Citation
Lee CK, Park DI, Lee SH, Hwangbo Y, Eun CS, Han DS, Cha JM, Lee BI, Shin JE. Participation by experienced endoscopy nurses increases the detection rate of colon polyps during a screening colonoscopy: a multicenter, prospective, randomized study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Nov;74(5):1094-102. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.06.033. Epub 2011 Sep 1.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21481861
Citation
Buchner AM, Shahid MW, Heckman MG, Diehl NN, McNeil RB, Cleveland P, Gill KR, Schore A, Ghabril M, Raimondo M, Gross SA, Wallace MB. Trainee participation is associated with increased small adenoma detection. Gastrointest Endosc. 2011 Jun;73(6):1223-31. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2011.01.060. Epub 2011 Apr 8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25251748
Citation
Gralnek IM. Emerging technological advancements in colonoscopy: Third Eye(R) Retroscope(R) and Third Eye(R) Panoramic(TM) , Fuse(R) Full Spectrum Endoscopy(R) colonoscopy platform, Extra-Wide-Angle-View colonoscope, and NaviAid(TM) G-EYE(TM) balloon colonoscope. Dig Endosc. 2015 Jan;27(2):223-31. doi: 10.1111/den.12382. Epub 2014 Nov 17.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24639382
Citation
Kaminski MF, Hassan C, Bisschops R, Pohl J, Pellise M, Dekker E, Ignjatovic-Wilson A, Hoffman A, Longcroft-Wheaton G, Heresbach D, Dumonceau JM, East JE. Advanced imaging for detection and differentiation of colorectal neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline. Endoscopy. 2014 May;46(5):435-49. doi: 10.1055/s-0034-1365348. Epub 2014 Mar 17.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31711241
Citation
Bisschops R, East JE, Hassan C, Hazewinkel Y, Kaminski MF, Neumann H, Pellise M, Antonelli G, Bustamante Balen M, Coron E, Cortas G, Iacucci M, Yuichi M, Longcroft-Wheaton G, Mouzyka S, Pilonis N, Puig I, van Hooft JE, Dekker E. Advanced imaging for detection and differentiation of colorectal neoplasia: European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy (ESGE) Guideline - Update 2019. Endoscopy. 2019 Dec;51(12):1155-1179. doi: 10.1055/a-1031-7657. Epub 2019 Nov 11. Erratum In: Endoscopy. 2019 Dec;51(12):C6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30489414
Citation
Parekh PJ, Oldfield EC 4th, Johnson DA. Bowel preparation for colonoscopy: what is best and necessary for quality? Curr Opin Gastroenterol. 2019 Jan;35(1):51-57. doi: 10.1097/MOG.0000000000000494.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
25448873
Citation
Rex DK, Schoenfeld PS, Cohen J, Pike IM, Adler DG, Fennerty MB, Lieb JG 2nd, Park WG, Rizk MK, Sawhney MS, Shaheen NJ, Wani S, Weinberg DS. Quality indicators for colonoscopy. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015 Jan;110(1):72-90. doi: 10.1038/ajg.2014.385. Epub 2014 Dec 2. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19136102
Citation
Lai EJ, Calderwood AH, Doros G, Fix OK, Jacobson BC. The Boston bowel preparation scale: a valid and reliable instrument for colonoscopy-oriented research. Gastrointest Endosc. 2009 Mar;69(3 Pt 2):620-5. doi: 10.1016/j.gie.2008.05.057. Epub 2009 Jan 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30105375
Citation
Mori Y, Kudo SE, Misawa M, Saito Y, Ikematsu H, Hotta K, Ohtsuka K, Urushibara F, Kataoka S, Ogawa Y, Maeda Y, Takeda K, Nakamura H, Ichimasa K, Kudo T, Hayashi T, Wakamura K, Ishida F, Inoue H, Itoh H, Oda M, Mori K. Real-Time Use of Artificial Intelligence in Identification of Diminutive Polyps During Colonoscopy: A Prospective Study. Ann Intern Med. 2018 Sep 18;169(6):357-366. doi: 10.7326/M18-0249. Epub 2018 Aug 14.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
29653147
Citation
Misawa M, Kudo SE, Mori Y, Cho T, Kataoka S, Yamauchi A, Ogawa Y, Maeda Y, Takeda K, Ichimasa K, Nakamura H, Yagawa Y, Toyoshima N, Ogata N, Kudo T, Hisayuki T, Hayashi T, Wakamura K, Baba T, Ishida F, Itoh H, Roth H, Oda M, Mori K. Artificial Intelligence-Assisted Polyp Detection for Colonoscopy: Initial Experience. Gastroenterology. 2018 Jun;154(8):2027-2029.e3. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2018.04.003. Epub 2018 Apr 11. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26609349
Citation
Delavari A, Salimzadeh H, Bishehsari F, Sobh Rakhshankhah E, Delavari F, Moossavi S, Khosravi P, Nasseri-Moghaddam S, Merat S, Ansari R, Vahedi H, Shahbazkhani B, Saberifiroozi M, Sotoudeh M, Malekzadeh R. Mean Polyp per Patient Is an Accurate and Readily Obtainable Surrogate for Adenoma Detection Rate: Results from an Opportunistic Screening Colonoscopy Program. Middle East J Dig Dis. 2015 Oct;7(4):214-9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30814121
Citation
Wang P, Berzin TM, Glissen Brown JR, Bharadwaj S, Becq A, Xiao X, Liu P, Li L, Song Y, Zhang D, Li Y, Xu G, Tu M, Liu X. Real-time automatic detection system increases colonoscopic polyp and adenoma detection rates: a prospective randomised controlled study. Gut. 2019 Oct;68(10):1813-1819. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2018-317500. Epub 2019 Feb 27.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
29580179
Citation
Lauby-Secretan B, Vilahur N, Bianchini F, Guha N, Straif K; International Agency for Research on Cancer Handbook Working Group. The IARC Perspective on Colorectal Cancer Screening. N Engl J Med. 2018 May 3;378(18):1734-1740. doi: 10.1056/NEJMsr1714643. Epub 2018 Mar 26. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
30738046
Citation
Zhao S, Wang S, Pan P, Xia T, Chang X, Yang X, Guo L, Meng Q, Yang F, Qian W, Xu Z, Wang Y, Wang Z, Gu L, Wang R, Jia F, Yao J, Li Z, Bai Y. Magnitude, Risk Factors, and Factors Associated With Adenoma Miss Rate of Tandem Colonoscopy: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Gastroenterology. 2019 May;156(6):1661-1674.e11. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.01.260. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22105578
Citation
Rutter CM, Johnson E, Miglioretti DL, Mandelson MT, Inadomi J, Buist DS. Adverse events after screening and follow-up colonoscopy. Cancer Causes Control. 2012 Feb;23(2):289-96. doi: 10.1007/s10552-011-9878-5. Epub 2011 Nov 22.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17179057
Citation
Levin TR, Zhao W, Conell C, Seeff LC, Manninen DL, Shapiro JA, Schulman J. Complications of colonoscopy in an integrated health care delivery system. Ann Intern Med. 2006 Dec 19;145(12):880-6. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-145-12-200612190-00004.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
31158369
Citation
Feagins LA, Smith AD, Kim D, Halai A, Duttala S, Chebaa B, Lunsford T, Vizuete J, Mara M, Mascarenhas R, Meghani R, Kundrotas L, Dunbar KB, Cipher DJ, Harford WV, Spechler SJ. Efficacy of Prophylactic Hemoclips in Prevention of Delayed Post-Polypectomy Bleeding in Patients With Large Colonic Polyps. Gastroenterology. 2019 Oct;157(4):967-976.e1. doi: 10.1053/j.gastro.2019.05.003. Epub 2019 May 31.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
10840301
Citation
Sorbi D, Norton I, Conio M, Balm R, Zinsmeister A, Gostout CJ. Postpolypectomy lower GI bleeding: descriptive analysis. Gastrointest Endosc. 2000 Jun;51(6):690-6. doi: 10.1067/mge.2000.105773.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
2281231
Citation
Hwang IK, Shih WJ, De Cani JS. Group sequential designs using a family of type I error probability spending functions. Stat Med. 1990 Dec;9(12):1439-45. doi: 10.1002/sim.4780091207.
Results Reference
background

Learn more about this trial

To Compare Artificial Intelligence Software Aided Adenoma Detection in Screening Colonoscopies Versus Standard Colonoscopy Without Artificial Intelligence Software Assistance in Participants Between 45 and 75 Years of Age

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs