- ICH GCP
- US Clinical Trials Registry
- Clinical Trial NCT00474968
Adequacy and Efficacy of the e2TM Cervical Cell Collector Compared to Standard Spatula/CytoBrush Technique.
November 16, 2009 updated by: CytoCore, Inc.
Clinical Study Validating the Adequacy, Efficacy, and Safety of the e2TM Cervical Cell Collector Compared to Standard Spatula/CytoBrush Technique In Patients With Recent History of Abnormal Pap Test Returning for Colposcopy/Biopsy.
A clinical study to determine the adequacy and efficacy of the InPath e2TM Collector compared to the FDA-approved spatula/cytobrush when used as the cell collection device in screening for cervical cancer.
The InPath e2TM Collector name has been changed to the CytoCore SoftPAP(R) Collector
Study Overview
Status
Completed
Conditions
Intervention / Treatment
Detailed Description
The e2TM (SoftPAP) Collector collects only cells that have been exfoliated from the cervix whereas spatulas, brushes and broom-style collection devices collect cells by scraping or abrading the cervix.
THis trial is to determine whether the purely exfoliated sample collected using the e2TM Collector is equivalent to samples obtained by scraping or abrading the cervix for purposes of cervical cancer screening and HPV detection.
Study Type
Observational
Enrollment (Actual)
737
Contacts and Locations
This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.
Study Locations
-
-
Florida
-
Wellington, Florida, United States, 33414
- Visions Clinical Research
-
West Palm Beach, Florida, United States, 33409
- Comprehensive Clinical Trials
-
-
Missouri
-
St. Louis, Missouri, United States, 63106
- St. Louis University
-
-
Ohio
-
Cincinnati, Ohio, United States, 45206
- University of Cincinnati
-
-
Pennsylvania
-
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, United States, 15213
- University of Pittsburgh Medical Centers
-
-
Texas
-
Fort Worth, Texas, United States, 75246
- Baylor Research Institute
-
-
Virginia
-
Norfolk, Virginia, United States, 23510
- Eastern Virginia Medical School
-
-
Participation Criteria
Researchers look for people who fit a certain description, called eligibility criteria. Some examples of these criteria are a person's general health condition or prior treatments.
Eligibility Criteria
Ages Eligible for Study
18 years and older (Adult, Older Adult)
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Genders Eligible for Study
Female
Sampling Method
Non-Probability Sample
Study Population
Women > 18 years of age with an abnormal pap within 30 days to 1 year for whom a colposcopy is scheduled.
Description
Inclusion Criteria:
- Women ages 18 years old and above
- Women scheduled to undergo colposcopy
Exclusion Criteria:
- Patients who have had a hysterectomy
- Patients who are pregnant.
Study Plan
This section provides details of the study plan, including how the study is designed and what the study is measuring.
How is the study designed?
Design Details
Cohorts and Interventions
Group / Cohort |
Intervention / Treatment |
|---|---|
|
Arm 1 - Experimental
e2 Cell Collector [SoftPAP(R)]
|
Cervical cells collected using the e2 Cell Collector [SoftPAP(R)]
|
|
Arm 2 - Control
Brush/spatula
|
Cervical cells collected using a combination of a cervical spatula and an endocervical brush
|
What is the study measuring?
Primary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Cell Collection Efficacy
Time Frame: At the time of cell collection.
|
True Positive (TP); True Negative (TN), False Positive (FP) and False Negative (FN) participants and percentage of participants based upon comparison of the cytology diagnosis (Dx) with biopsy (Bx) and endocervical curretage (ECC) results from the same patient.
|
At the time of cell collection.
|
|
Specimen Adequacy
Time Frame: At time of cell collection
|
Number and percentage of samples classified as adequate for diagnosis
|
At time of cell collection
|
Secondary Outcome Measures
Outcome Measure |
Measure Description |
Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
|
Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) Detection Frequency
Time Frame: At the time of cell collection.
|
Number and percentage of HPV positive specimens by the Hybrid Capture II (HC-II) assay
|
At the time of cell collection.
|
Collaborators and Investigators
This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.
Sponsor
Collaborators
Investigators
- Principal Investigator: Jay S. Pinkerton, MD, University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center
Publications and helpful links
The person responsible for entering information about the study voluntarily provides these publications. These may be about anything related to the study.
General Publications
- Munoz N, Bosch FX, de Sanjose S, Herrero R, Castellsague X, Shah KV, Snijders PJ, Meijer CJ; International Agency for Research on Cancer Multicenter Cervical Cancer Study Group. Epidemiologic classification of human papillomavirus types associated with cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003 Feb 6;348(6):518-27. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa021641.
- Solomon D, Davey D, Kurman R, Moriarty A, O'Connor D, Prey M, Raab S, Sherman M, Wilbur D, Wright T Jr, Young N; Forum Group Members; Bethesda 2001 Workshop. The 2001 Bethesda System: terminology for reporting results of cervical cytology. JAMA. 2002 Apr 24;287(16):2114-9. doi: 10.1001/jama.287.16.2114.
- Sankaranarayanan R, Budukh AM, Rajkumar R. Effective screening programmes for cervical cancer in low- and middle-income developing countries. Bull World Health Organ. 2001;79(10):954-62. Epub 2001 Nov 1.
- Waxman AG. Guidelines for cervical cancer screening: history and scientific rationale. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 2005 Mar;48(1):77-97. doi: 10.1097/01.grf.0000151590.08451.26. No abstract available.
- Holowaty P, Miller AB, Rohan T, To T. RESPONSE: re: natural history of dysplasia of the uterine cervix. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999 Aug 18;91(16):1420A-1421. doi: 10.1093/jnci/91.16.1420a. No abstract available.
- Nanda K, McCrory DC, Myers ER, Bastian LA, Hasselblad V, Hickey JD, Matchar DB. Accuracy of the Papanicolaou test in screening for and follow-up of cervical cytologic abnormalities: a systematic review. Ann Intern Med. 2000 May 16;132(10):810-9. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-132-10-200005160-00009.
- Fahey MT, Irwig L, Macaskill P. Meta-analysis of Pap test accuracy. Am J Epidemiol. 1995 Apr 1;141(7):680-9. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a117485.
- Clavel C, Masure M, Bory JP, Putaud I, Mangeonjean C, Lorenzato M, Nazeyrollas P, Gabriel R, Quereux C, Birembaut P. Human papillomavirus testing in primary screening for the detection of high-grade cervical lesions: a study of 7932 women. Br J Cancer. 2001 Jun 15;84(12):1616-23. doi: 10.1054/bjoc.2001.1845.
- Willis BH, Barton P, Pearmain P, Bryan S, Hyde C. Cervical screening programmes: can automation help? Evidence from systematic reviews, an economic analysis and a simulation modelling exercise applied to the UK. Health Technol Assess. 2005 Mar;9(13):1-207, iii. doi: 10.3310/hta9130.
- Buntinx F, Brouwers M. Relation between sampling device and detection of abnormality in cervical smears: a meta-analysis of randomised and quasi-randomised studies. BMJ. 1996 Nov 23;313(7068):1285-90. doi: 10.1136/bmj.313.7068.1285.
- Martin-Hirsch P, Lilford R, Jarvis G, Kitchener HC. Efficacy of cervical-smear collection devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Lancet. 1999 Nov 20;354(9192):1763-70. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(99)02353-3. Erratum In: Lancet 2000 Jan 29;355(9201):414.
- Martin-Hirsch P, Jarvis G, Kitchener H, Lilford R. Collection devices for obtaining cervical cytology samples. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD001036. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001036.
- Selvaggi SM, Guidos BJ. Specimen adequacy and the ThinPrep Pap Test: the endocervical component. Diagn Cytopathol. 2000 Jul;23(1):23-6. doi: 10.1002/1097-0339(200007)23:13.0.CO;2-K.
- Marchand L, Mundt M, Klein G, Agarwal SC. Optimal collection technique and devices for a quality pap smear. WMJ. 2005 Aug;104(6):51-5.
- Koss LG. Evolution in cervical pathology and cytology: a historical perspective. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 2000;21(6):550-4. No abstract available.
Study record dates
These dates track the progress of study record and summary results submissions to ClinicalTrials.gov. Study records and reported results are reviewed by the National Library of Medicine (NLM) to make sure they meet specific quality control standards before being posted on the public website.
Study Major Dates
Study Start
April 1, 2007
Primary Completion (Actual)
May 1, 2008
Study Completion (Actual)
May 1, 2008
Study Registration Dates
First Submitted
May 16, 2007
First Submitted That Met QC Criteria
May 16, 2007
First Posted (Estimate)
May 17, 2007
Study Record Updates
Last Update Posted (Estimate)
November 20, 2009
Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria
November 16, 2009
Last Verified
November 1, 2009
More Information
Terms related to this study
Other Study ID Numbers
- e2TM Cervical cell Collector
This information was retrieved directly from the website clinicaltrials.gov without any changes. If you have any requests to change, remove or update your study details, please contact register@clinicaltrials.gov. As soon as a change is implemented on clinicaltrials.gov, this will be updated automatically on our website as well.