Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiographically Guided Management to Optimise Outcomes in Unstable Coronary Syndromes
FAMOUS NSTEMI
A Developmental Clinical Study of Management Guided by Coronary Angiography Combined With Fractional Flow Reserve (FFR) Measurement Versus Management Guided by Coronary Angiography Alone(Standard Care) in Patients With Non-ST Elevation MI.
2 other identifiers
interventional
350
1 country
6
Brief Summary
Background: In patients with acute non-ST elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) coronary arteriography is usually recommended however visual interpretation of the coronary angiogram is subjective. A complementary diagnostic approach involves measuring the pressure drop across a coronary stenosis (fractional flow reserve, FFR) with a pressure-sensitive guidewire. Hypothesis: Routine FFR measurement is feasible in NSTEMI patients and has additive diagnostic, clinical and health economic utility, as compared to angiography-guided standard care. Design: A prospective multi-center randomized controlled trial in 350 NSTEMI patients with ≥1 coronary stenosis ≥30% severity (threshold for FFR measurement). Patients will be randomized immediately after coronary angiography to the FFR-guided group or angiography-guided group (FFR measured, not disclosed). All patients will then undergo FFR measurement in all vessels with a coronary stenosis ≥30% severity. FFR will be measured in culprit and non-culprit lesions in all patients. FFR will be disclosed to guide treatment in the FFR guided-group but not disclosed in the 'angiography-guided' group. In the FFR-guided group, an FFR\>0.80 will be an indication for medical therapy whereas an FFR≤0.80 will be an indication for revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG), as appropriate. The primary endpoint is the between-group difference in the proportion of patients allocated to medical management compared to revascularization. A key secondary composite outcome is the occurrence of cardiac death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction or heart failure. Other secondary outcomes include quality of life, hospitalization for unstable angina, coronary revascularization or stroke, and healthcare costs. Exploratory analyses will also assess the relationships between FFR and angiographic lesion characteristics (severity, culprit status). The minimum and average follow-up periods for the primary analysis are 6 and 18 months respectively. A secondary analysis with longer term follow-up (minimum 3 years) is planned. Screen failures who gave informed consent will be entered into a registry. Importance: Our developmental clinical trial will address the feasibility of FFR measurement in NSTEMI and the influence of FFR disclosure on treatment decisions and health and economic outcomes.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for phase_4
Started Oct 2011
Longer than P75 for phase_4
6 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
October 1, 2011
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
December 24, 2012
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 9, 2013
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
June 1, 2014
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
June 1, 2020
CompletedJune 14, 2017
June 1, 2017
2.7 years
December 24, 2012
June 10, 2017
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
The between-group difference in the proportion of patients allocated to medical management compared to revascularization.
The between-group difference in the proportion of patients allocated to medical management compared to coronary revascularization by percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) or coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG).
Baseline: the treatment decision will be made by the clinical team in the cardiac catheter laboratory during the index procedure or shortly afterwards during the index hospitalization when a multidisciplinary heart team review is indicated.
Secondary Outcomes (5)
The safety and feasibility of routine FFR measurement in patients with recent NSTEMI.
Post randomization index procedure at baseline.
The % rate of discordance between an FFR <= or >0.80 and coronary stenosis severity (stenosis > or <70% of reference vessel diameter (50% for left main) assessed visually).
Baseline: Visual assessment of the angiogram before randomization, index procedure
Major adverse cardiac events are defined as cardiac death or hospitalization for myocardial infarction (MI) or heart failure.
Post-randomization (any time including the index procedure through follow-up), expected average follow-up of 18 months (minimum follow-up 6 months).
Health economics
Post-randomization (including the index procedure through longer term mean follow-up of 18 months (minimum follow-up 6 months).
Quality of life
Baseline through longer term follow-up (average follow-up 18 months, minimum follow-up 6 months)
Study Arms (2)
Fractional flow reserve
ACTIVE COMPARATORFractional flow reserve - guided group: The initial treatment decision and the coronary arteries for fractional flow reserve (FFR) measurement will be established and recorded before randomization. FFR will then be measured by the cardiologist immediately after randomization and the FFR result will used to guide treatment decisions based on a threshold of 0.80. An FFR ≤ 0.80 should result in a treatment decision for revascularization by PCI or CABG combined with optimal medical therapy and an FFR\>0.80 should result in treatment with optimal medical therapy alone. Changes in treatment compared to the treatment plan prior to FFR disclosure will be recorded at the time.
Angiography-guided
PLACEBO COMPARATORFFR is measured by but not disclosed to the clinical team. Treatment decisions are therefore guided by angiography but not by FFR. The patient and the clinical team, including the cardiologists and nurses, will be blinded to FFR. The RadiAnalyzer Xpress (St Jude Medical) will be turned away from the clinical team who will not see the pressure wire data. FFR will not be displayed on any other monitor. Quality control checks, such as assessments of equalized pressure, will be done in the usual way, by the unblinded clinical research team. These steps will be followed for all FFR measurements. Adherence to the blinding protocol, including any non-protocol FFR disclosure at any time, will be prospectively recorded and blinding procedures will be monitored with site visits.
Interventions
Guidewire-based coronary pressure measurement of myocardial FFR can identify obstructive coronary lesions in patients with stable coronary disease, and potentially, medically stabilized patients with recent MI. The FFR index is measured by a conventional coronary wire (0.014") with a pressure sensor on its distal tip during coronary hyperemia induced by intravenous or intracoronary adenosine. The potential diagnostic and prognostic benefit of guidewire-based coronary pressure measurement to inform the management and treatment of patients with recent acute NSTEMI will be assessed.
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- NSTEMI with an elevated troponin (\> upper limit of normal for local reference range) with at least one CAD risk factor (e.g. diabetes, age \> 65 years, prior CAD, prior peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, family history of CAD).
- At least one coronary lesion ≥ 30% stenosis severity.
- Invasive management scheduled within 10 days of admission and ideally performed within 72 h of admission or a history of recurrent ischemic symptoms within 5 days.
You may not qualify if:
- On-going ischemic symptoms (i.e. chest pain) not controlled by medical therapy.
- Cardiogenic shock or hemodynamic instability.
- Life expectancy of \< 1 year.
- MI with persistent ST elevation.
- Intolerance to anti-platelet drugs.
- Unsuitable for either PCI or CABG on clinical or angiographic grounds.
- Coronary artery disease \< 30% reference vessel diameter.
- Absence of a non-flow limiting coronary stenosis ≥30%.
- Non-coronary cardiac surgery (e.g. concomitant valve repair or replacement).
- Inability to give informed consent.
- Age \< 18 years (no upper age limit).
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- NHS National Waiting Times Centre Boardlead
- British Heart Foundationcollaborator
- Abbott Medical Devicescollaborator
- University of Glasgowcollaborator
Study Sites (6)
Golden Jubilee National Hospital
Clydebank, Dunbartonshire, G81 4DY, United Kingdom
Royal Blackburn Hospital
Blackburn, East Lancashire, BB2 3HH, United Kingdom
University Hospital Southampton NHS Foundation Trust
Southampton, Hampshire, S016 6YD, United Kingdom
Hairmyres Hospital
East Kilbride, Lanarkshire, G75 8RG, United Kingdom
Freeman Hospital
Newcastle upon Tyne, Tyne and Wear, NE7 7DN, United Kingdom
City Hospitals Sunderland NHS Foundation
Sunderland, Tyne and Wear, SR4 7TP, United Kingdom
Related Publications (31)
Hamm CW, Bassand JP, Agewall S, Bax J, Boersma E, Bueno H, Caso P, Dudek D, Gielen S, Huber K, Ohman M, Petrie MC, Sonntag F, Uva MS, Storey RF, Wijns W, Zahger D; ESC Committee for Practice Guidelines. ESC Guidelines for the management of acute coronary syndromes in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation: The Task Force for the management of acute coronary syndromes (ACS) in patients presenting without persistent ST-segment elevation of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). Eur Heart J. 2011 Dec;32(23):2999-3054. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehr236. Epub 2011 Aug 26. No abstract available.
PMID: 21873419BACKGROUNDTask Force on Myocardial Revascularization of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) and the European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS); European Association for Percutaneous Cardiovascular Interventions (EAPCI); Wijns W, Kolh P, Danchin N, Di Mario C, Falk V, Folliguet T, Garg S, Huber K, James S, Knuuti J, Lopez-Sendon J, Marco J, Menicanti L, Ostojic M, Piepoli MF, Pirlet C, Pomar JL, Reifart N, Ribichini FL, Schalij MJ, Sergeant P, Serruys PW, Silber S, Sousa Uva M, Taggart D. Guidelines on myocardial revascularization. Eur Heart J. 2010 Oct;31(20):2501-55. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehq277. Epub 2010 Aug 29. No abstract available.
PMID: 20802248BACKGROUNDSelby JV, Fireman BH, Lundstrom RJ, Swain BE, Truman AF, Wong CC, Froelicher ES, Barron HV, Hlatky MA. Variation among hospitals in coronary-angiography practices and outcomes after myocardial infarction in a large health maintenance organization. N Engl J Med. 1996 Dec 19;335(25):1888-96. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199612193352506.
PMID: 8948565BACKGROUNDWhite CW, Wright CB, Doty DB, Hiratza LF, Eastham CL, Harrison DG, Marcus ML. Does visual interpretation of the coronary arteriogram predict the physiologic importance of a coronary stenosis? N Engl J Med. 1984 Mar 29;310(13):819-24. doi: 10.1056/NEJM198403293101304.
PMID: 6700670BACKGROUNDBotman KJ, Pijls NH, Bech JW, Aarnoudse W, Peels K, van Straten B, Penn O, Michels HR, Bonnier H, Koolen JJ. Percutaneous coronary intervention or bypass surgery in multivessel disease? A tailored approach based on coronary pressure measurement. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2004 Oct;63(2):184-91. doi: 10.1002/ccd.20175.
PMID: 15390344BACKGROUNDPijls NH, van Schaardenburgh P, Manoharan G, Boersma E, Bech JW, van't Veer M, Bar F, Hoorntje J, Koolen J, Wijns W, de Bruyne B. Percutaneous coronary intervention of functionally nonsignificant stenosis: 5-year follow-up of the DEFER Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2007 May 29;49(21):2105-11. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2007.01.087. Epub 2007 May 17.
PMID: 17531660BACKGROUNDTonino PA, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Siebert U, Ikeno F, van' t Veer M, Klauss V, Manoharan G, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Ver Lee PN, MacCarthy PA, Fearon WF; FAME Study Investigators. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography for guiding percutaneous coronary intervention. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jan 15;360(3):213-24. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa0807611.
PMID: 19144937BACKGROUNDDe Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Kalesan B, Barbato E, Tonino PA, Piroth Z, Jagic N, Mobius-Winkler S, Rioufol G, Witt N, Kala P, MacCarthy P, Engstrom T, Oldroyd KG, Mavromatis K, Manoharan G, Verlee P, Frobert O, Curzen N, Johnson JB, Juni P, Fearon WF; FAME 2 Trial Investigators. Fractional flow reserve-guided PCI versus medical therapy in stable coronary disease. N Engl J Med. 2012 Sep 13;367(11):991-1001. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1205361. Epub 2012 Aug 27.
PMID: 22924638BACKGROUNDFearon WF, Bornschein B, Tonino PA, Gothe RM, Bruyne BD, Pijls NH, Siebert U; Fractional Flow Reserve Versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation (FAME) Study Investigators. Economic evaluation of fractional flow reserve-guided percutaneous coronary intervention in patients with multivessel disease. Circulation. 2010 Dec 14;122(24):2545-50. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.109.925396. Epub 2010 Nov 29.
PMID: 21126973BACKGROUNDBech GJ, Droste H, Pijls NH, De Bruyne B, Bonnier JJ, Michels HR, Peels KH, Koolen JJ. Value of fractional flow reserve in making decisions about bypass surgery for equivocal left main coronary artery disease. Heart. 2001 Nov;86(5):547-52. doi: 10.1136/heart.86.5.547.
PMID: 11602550BACKGROUNDDe Bruyne B, Pijls NH, Bartunek J, Kulecki K, Bech JW, De Winter H, Van Crombrugge P, Heyndrickx GR, Wijns W. Fractional flow reserve in patients with prior myocardial infarction. Circulation. 2001 Jul 10;104(2):157-62. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.104.2.157.
PMID: 11447079BACKGROUNDTonino PA, Fearon WF, De Bruyne B, Oldroyd KG, Leesar MA, Ver Lee PN, Maccarthy PA, Van't Veer M, Pijls NH. Angiographic versus functional severity of coronary artery stenoses in the FAME study fractional flow reserve versus angiography in multivessel evaluation. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2010 Jun 22;55(25):2816-21. doi: 10.1016/j.jacc.2009.11.096.
PMID: 20579537BACKGROUNDUren NG, Crake T, Lefroy DC, de Silva R, Davies GJ, Maseri A. Reduced coronary vasodilator function in infarcted and normal myocardium after myocardial infarction. N Engl J Med. 1994 Jul 28;331(4):222-7. doi: 10.1056/NEJM199407283310402.
PMID: 7832835BACKGROUNDNtalianis A, Sels JW, Davidavicius G, Tanaka N, Muller O, Trana C, Barbato E, Hamilos M, Mangiacapra F, Heyndrickx GR, Wijns W, Pijls NH, De Bruyne B. Fractional flow reserve for the assessment of nonculprit coronary artery stenoses in patients with acute myocardial infarction. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2010 Dec;3(12):1274-81. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2010.08.025.
PMID: 21232721BACKGROUNDPotvin JM, Rodes-Cabau J, Bertrand OF, Gleeton O, Nguyen CN, Barbeau G, Proulx G, De Larochelliere R, Dery JP, Batalla N, Dana A, Facta A, Roy L. Usefulness of fractional flow reserve measurements to defer revascularization in patients with stable or unstable angina pectoris, non-ST-elevation and ST-elevation acute myocardial infarction, or atypical chest pain. Am J Cardiol. 2006 Aug 1;98(3):289-97. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2006.02.032. Epub 2006 Jun 6.
PMID: 16860011BACKGROUNDLeesar MA, Abdul-Baki T, Akkus NI, Sharma A, Kannan T, Bolli R. Use of fractional flow reserve versus stress perfusion scintigraphy after unstable angina. Effect on duration of hospitalization, cost, procedural characteristics, and clinical outcome. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2003 Apr 2;41(7):1115-21. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(03)00057-3.
PMID: 12679210BACKGROUNDSels JW, Tonino PA, Siebert U, Fearon WF, Van't Veer M, De Bruyne B, Pijls NH. Fractional flow reserve in unstable angina and non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction experience from the FAME (Fractional flow reserve versus Angiography for Multivessel Evaluation) study. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2011 Nov;4(11):1183-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2011.08.008.
PMID: 22115657BACKGROUNDRosner GF, Kirtane AJ, Genereux P, Lansky AJ, Cristea E, Gersh BJ, Weisz G, Parise H, Fahy M, Mehran R, Stone GW. Impact of the presence and extent of incomplete angiographic revascularization after percutaneous coronary intervention in acute coronary syndromes: the Acute Catheterization and Urgent Intervention Triage Strategy (ACUITY) trial. Circulation. 2012 May 29;125(21):2613-20. doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.111.069237. Epub 2012 May 1.
PMID: 22550156BACKGROUNDCarrick D, Behan M, Foo F, Christie J, Hillis WS, Norrie J, Oldroyd KG, Berry C. Usefulness of fractional flow reserve to improve diagnostic efficiency in patients with non-ST elevation myocardial infarction. Am J Cardiol. 2013 Jan 1;111(1):45-50. doi: 10.1016/j.amjcard.2012.08.046. Epub 2012 Oct 2.
PMID: 23040601BACKGROUNDBalachandran KP, Berry C, Norrie J, Vallance BD, Malekianpour M, Gilbert TJ, Pell AC, Oldroyd KG. Relation between coronary pressure derived collateral flow, myocardial perfusion grade, and outcome in left ventricular function after rescue percutaneous coronary intervention. Heart. 2004 Dec;90(12):1450-4. doi: 10.1136/hrt.2003.023606.
PMID: 15547027BACKGROUNDBerry C, Layland J, Sood A, Curzen NP, Balachandran KP, Das R, Junejo S, Henderson RA, Briggs AH, Ford I, Oldroyd KG. Fractional flow reserve versus angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-elevation myocardial infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI): rationale and design of a randomized controlled clinical trial. Am Heart J. 2013 Oct;166(4):662-668.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.ahj.2013.07.011. Epub 2013 Aug 27.
PMID: 24093845BACKGROUNDLayland J, Berry C. Intracoronary Adenosine for Maximal Hyperemia: Less Is More...More or Less? JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Sep;8(11):1431-1432. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2015.04.027. No abstract available.
PMID: 26404194BACKGROUNDLayland J, Nerlekar N, Palmer S, Berry C, Oldroyd K. Invasive assessment of the coronary microcirculation in the catheter laboratory. Int J Cardiol. 2015 Nov 15;199:141-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.05.190. Epub 2015 Jul 8.
PMID: 26197399BACKGROUNDLayland J, Carrick D, McEntegart M, Ahmed N, Payne A, McClure J, Sood A, McGeoch R, MacIsaac A, Whitbourn R, Wilson A, Oldroyd K, Berry C. Vasodilatory capacity of the coronary microcirculation is preserved in selected patients with non-ST-segment-elevation myocardial infarction. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2013 Jun;6(3):231-6. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.112.000180. Epub 2013 Jun 11.
PMID: 23756697BACKGROUNDLayland J, Rauhalammi S, Lee MM, Ahmed N, Carberry J, Teng Yue May V, Watkins S, McComb C, Mangion K, McClure JD, Carrick D, O'Donnell A, Sood A, McEntegart M, Oldroyd KG, Radjenovic A, Berry C. Diagnostic Accuracy of 3.0-T Magnetic Resonance T1 and T2 Mapping and T2-Weighted Dark-Blood Imaging for the Infarct-Related Coronary Artery in Non-ST-Segment Elevation Myocardial Infarction. J Am Heart Assoc. 2017 Mar 31;6(4):e004759. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.116.004759.
PMID: 28364045RESULTNam J, Briggs A, Layland J, Oldroyd KG, Curzen N, Sood A, Balachandran K, Das R, Junejo S, Eteiba H, Petrie MC, Lindsay M, Watkins S, Corbett S, O'Rourke B, O'Donnell A, Stewart A, Hannah A, McConnachie A, Henderson R, Berry C. Fractional flow reserve (FFR) versus angiography in guiding management to optimise outcomes in non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (FAMOUS-NSTEMI) developmental trial: cost-effectiveness using a mixed trial- and model-based methods. Cost Eff Resour Alloc. 2015 Nov 14;13:19. doi: 10.1186/s12962-015-0045-9. eCollection 2015.
PMID: 26578850RESULTAhmed N, Layland J, Carrick D, Petrie MC, McEntegart M, Eteiba H, Hood S, Lindsay M, Watkins S, Davie A, Mahrous A, Carberry J, Teng V, McConnachie A, Curzen N, Oldroyd KG, Berry C. Safety of guidewire-based measurement of fractional flow reserve and the index of microvascular resistance using intravenous adenosine in patients with acute or recent myocardial infarction. Int J Cardiol. 2016 Jan 1;202:305-10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2015.09.014. Epub 2015 Sep 18.
PMID: 26418191RESULTLayland J, Rauhalammi S, Watkins S, Ahmed N, McClure J, Lee MM, Carrick D, O'Donnell A, Sood A, Petrie MC, May VT, Eteiba H, Lindsay M, McEntegart M, Oldroyd KG, Radjenovic A, Berry C. Assessment of Fractional Flow Reserve in Patients With Recent Non-ST-Segment-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: Comparative Study With 3-T Stress Perfusion Cardiac Magnetic Resonance Imaging. Circ Cardiovasc Interv. 2015 Aug;8(8):e002207. doi: 10.1161/CIRCINTERVENTIONS.114.002207.
PMID: 26253733RESULTBerry C, Corcoran D, Hennigan B, Watkins S, Layland J, Oldroyd KG. Fractional flow reserve-guided management in stable coronary disease and acute myocardial infarction: recent developments. Eur Heart J. 2015 Dec 1;36(45):3155-64. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehv206. Epub 2015 Jun 2.
PMID: 26038588RESULTLayland J, Oldroyd KG, Curzen N, Sood A, Balachandran K, Das R, Junejo S, Ahmed N, Lee MM, Shaukat A, O'Donnell A, Nam J, Briggs A, Henderson R, McConnachie A, Berry C; FAMOUS-NSTEMI investigators. Fractional flow reserve vs. angiography in guiding management to optimize outcomes in non-ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction: the British Heart Foundation FAMOUS-NSTEMI randomized trial. Eur Heart J. 2015 Jan 7;36(2):100-11. doi: 10.1093/eurheartj/ehu338. Epub 2014 Sep 1.
PMID: 25179764RESULTLayland J, Carrick D, Lee M, Oldroyd K, Berry C. Adenosine: physiology, pharmacology, and clinical applications. JACC Cardiovasc Interv. 2014 Jun;7(6):581-91. doi: 10.1016/j.jcin.2014.02.009. Epub 2014 May 14.
PMID: 24835328RESULT
Related Links
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Colin Berry, MD PhD
University of Glasgow
- STUDY CHAIR
Robert Henderson, MD FRCP
Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Ian Ford, PhD
Robertson Centre for Biostatistics - University of Glasgow
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Andrew Briggs, PhD
Health Economics and Health Technology Assessment, University of Glasgow
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 4
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- QUADRUPLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER, INVESTIGATOR, OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
- Masking Details
- Blinding of FFR result
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Professor Colin Berry
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
December 24, 2012
First Posted
January 9, 2013
Study Start
October 1, 2011
Primary Completion
June 1, 2014
Study Completion
June 1, 2020
Last Updated
June 14, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-06
Data Sharing
- IPD Sharing
- Will share
Data sharing for the purposes of collaborative research is possible pending regulatory approval and institutional data sharing agreements.