Efficacy, Safety and Tolerability of Eziclen in Adult Subjects Undergoing Colonoscopy
ESTOS
1 other identifier
interventional
296
1 country
3
Brief Summary
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate that Eziclen is non-inferior to Fortrans® (the reference colonic lavage in Russia) administered in adult subjects scheduled to undergo colonoscopy for a routinely accepted diagnostic indication.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P50-P75 for phase_3
Started Mar 2015
Shorter than P25 for phase_3
3 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
First Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
December 17, 2014
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
December 22, 2014
CompletedStudy Start
First participant enrolled
March 1, 2015
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
December 1, 2015
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
December 1, 2015
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
February 27, 2019
CompletedMarch 4, 2019
March 1, 2019
9 months
December 17, 2014
January 11, 2018
March 1, 2019
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Adjusted Percentage of Patients With Successful Overall Colon Preparation, Assessed by the Global Score of the Boston Bowel Preparation Scale (BBPS).
The BBPS score for each colon segment (right, transverse and left colon) was assessed by 3 blinded experts as follows: 0=unprepared segment with mucosa not seen due to solid stool that cannot be cleared , 1=portion of mucosa of the segment seen, but other areas not well seen due to staining, residual stool and/or opaque liquid, 2=-minor amount of residual staining, small fragments of stool and/or opaque liquid, but mucosa of segment seen well, 3=entire mucosa of segment seen well with no residual staining, small fragments of stool and/or opaque liquid. A reconciled score based on the 3 blinded reviews was used to calculate the global BBPS score, ranging from 0 to 9 (worst to best). A successful overall colon preparation was defined as a global score ≥6 for the 3 colon segments. The percentage of patients with a successful preparation was determined using a logistic regression model, adjusted on centre, age class (\<= 65; \> 65), gender and inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) status.
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
Secondary Outcomes (7)
Mean BBPS Score by Segment and Globally (ITT Population)
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
Mean BBPS Score for Right Colon and Transverse Colon Segment (PP Population)
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
The Percentage of Patients in Whom Lesions Were Detected.
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
The Percentage of Patients for Whom the Colonoscopy Was Completed
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
Mean Colonoscopy Duration
Colonoscopy was performed on Day 2.
- +2 more secondary outcomes
Study Arms (2)
Eziclen
EXPERIMENTALFortrans®
ACTIVE COMPARATORInterventions
Eligibility Criteria
You may qualify if:
- Provision of written informed consent signed prior to any study related procedures
- Male or female, at least 18 years old undergoing colonoscopy for a routine diagnostic indication:
- Routine cancer screening
- Polyp or neoplasm history
- Diagnostic procedure for occult bleeding or anaemia
- Diarrhoea or constipation of unknown aetiology
- IBD if not in severe acute phase
- Abnormal ultrasound exam (i.e. mass in abdomen)
- Evaluation of barium enema or computed tomography (CT) scan results
- In good clinical condition (physical exam and medical history)
- Subjects with an adequate fluid balance, and adequate electrolyte balance (measured during screening K, Na, Cl, bicarbonate within normal/near normal range)
You may not qualify if:
- Has abnormal baseline findings, any other medical condition(s) or laboratory findings that, in the opinion of the investigator, might jeopardise the subject's safety or decrease the chance of obtaining satisfactory data needed to achieve the objective(s) of the study.
- Has an advanced carcinoma or any other colon disease leading to excessive mucosal fragility.
- Has a known or suspected gastrointestinal (GI) obstruction, gastric retention, gastroparesis, or disorder of gastric emptying.
- Has a known or suspected ileus.
- Has a bowel perforation.
- Has profuse vomiting.
- Needs a therapeutic procedure (e.g. polypectomy, mucosectomy).
- Has toxic colitis or megacolon.
- Is in severe acute phases of active IBD, as a contraindication for colonoscopy.
- Has acute GI bleeding.
- Underwent previous GI surgeries (e.g. colostomy, colectomy, gastric bypass, stomach stapling).
- Has impaired consciousness predisposing to pulmonary aspiration.
- Needs a colonoscopy for foreign body removal and decompression.
- Underwent previous incomplete colonoscopy.
- Has a known severe renal insufficiency (glomerular filtration rate (GFR) \<30 mL/min/1.73 m2).
- +11 more criteria
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- Ipsenlead
Study Sites (3)
State Healthcare Institution Municipal Clinical Hospital No. 31 of Moscow
Moscow, 119415, Russia
Federal State Budgetary Institution "State Scientifical Center of Coloproctology"
Moscow, 123423, Russia
State Healthcare Institution of Yaroslavl Region "Regional Clinical Cancer Hospital"
Yaroslavl, 150054, Russia
Limitations and Caveats
The differences in the Safety and ITT populations were due to 3 drug administration deviations. 2 patients initially randomized in the Fortrans® group received Eziclen and 1 patient initially randomized in the Eziclen group received Fortrans® .
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Medical Director
- Organization
- Ipsen Pharma
Study Officials
- STUDY DIRECTOR
Ipsen Medical Director
Ipsen
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restriction Type
- OTHER
- Restrictive Agreement
- Yes
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 3
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- SINGLE
- Who Masked
- INVESTIGATOR
- Purpose
- DIAGNOSTIC
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- INDUSTRY
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
December 17, 2014
First Posted
December 22, 2014
Study Start
March 1, 2015
Primary Completion
December 1, 2015
Study Completion
December 1, 2015
Last Updated
March 4, 2019
Results First Posted
February 27, 2019
Record last verified: 2019-03