USAGE OF ARITIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN AIDING WITH COLONIC SESSILE SERRATED LESIONS DETECTION AND DIAGNOSIS (AI-SSL) (AI-SSLD)

June 10, 2026 updated by: Chew Wei Da, National Healthcare Group, Singapore

USAGE OF ARITIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN AIDING WITH COLONIC SESSILE SERRATED LESIONS DETECTION AND DIAGNOSIS (AI-SSLD)

The aim of this study is to is to evaluate if a real-time Computer Aided Detection (CADe) system can help improve the detection of SSL(sessile serrated lesions) versus a conventional colonoscopy (CC) using white light examination(WLE).

Study Overview

Status

Recruiting

Conditions

Intervention / Treatment

Detailed Description

The serrated pathway is believed to account for 30% of all colorectal cancers (CRC). However, as detection rates vary widely among endoscopists and pathologists, there is uncertainty about the prevalence of these lesions [1]. Prevalence varies with study location, diagnostic criteria and examination quality. Relatively little is known about the epidemiology of these lesions (prevalence, location, family history) and risk of malignant transformation (timing, associated factors). A systematic review reported prevalence of sessile serrated lesions (SSL) was 3.9% in Europe and 5.1% in the US.

In Asia, only few reports on Sessile Serrated lesion (SSL) have been published. In a CRC screening study from Hong Kong recruiting 6,011 subjects, 486 (8.1%) subjects were reported to have HPs and only 85 (1.4%) SSL [2]. A study from Japan recruiting 5,218 asymptomatic subjects for CRC screening reported detection rates of serrated lesions of 23.3% and of right-sided serrated lesions of 7.6% respectively [3]. In this study, high-quality video endoscopes with narrow-band imaging (NBI) and magnification were used with 0.4% indigo carmine dye to enhance the detection of flat lesions. On the other hand, In Australia, the prevalence of SSL in Chinese (2%) was lower when compared with Caucasian (7%) subjects [4]. Studies have shown that SSLs are associated with CRC, especially those on the right colon and in the elderly age group, and hence should be detected and remove.[5] In addition to the potential for malignant transformation of SSL, individuals with these lesions are reportedly at higher risk of development of synchronous and metachronous CRC and advanced colorectal neoplasia (ACN) at other sites. [6-8]

Training for endoscopists and pathologists to identify SSL will likely increase detection rates, improve the prevalence of estimates of these lesions and hence reduce the incidence of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer [9] The high variability between studies on the SSL prevalence, is at least partly explained by varying detection rates of serrated lesions between endoscopists, as this rate appears highly operator dependent.

Currently, CADe has been shown to improve adenoma detection rate by around 30%.[10] With the existing algorithm, SSL detection has not been improved irrespective of endoscopist experience, system type or healthcare setting. [11] This is because focus has always been put on adenomatous polyps. SSLs are sessile or flat lesions measuring average size 5-7mm and can be easily missed during conventional colonoscopy as they are usually normal to pale in color They may exhibit distinct endoscopic features such as overlying mucus cap, cloud-like surface, ring of debris or stool around the lesion and obscured mucosal vasculature During narrow-band imaging endoscopy, they have a cloud-like appearance, irregular shape, and dark spots inside the crypts. Better bowel preparation, longer withdrawal time, and careful examination of the right colon (with repeated anterograde examination or retroflexion in the caecum) improved detection of SSL [12]. Electronic chromoendoscopy such as NBI may marginally improve the detection of SSL but is currently not recommended as mandatory practice, because clear scientific evidence is lacking.

Usage of CADe system has been shown in several studies to improve polyp detection rate even amongst junior endoscopists but however most of the CADE system is trained to focus on adenomatous polyp. This AI algorithm has been trained to detect SSL. If proven to be effective in a real-world setting, this will improve outcomes of patients undergoing colonoscopies and reduce the risk of interval colon cancers post colonoscopies.

We hypothesise that usage of CADe system can improve SSL detection significantly from 2% with conventional White Light endoscopy to 6.5%.

Study Type

Interventional

Enrollment (Estimated)

628

Phase

  • Not Applicable

Contacts and Locations

This section provides the contact details for those conducting the study, and information on where this study is being conducted.

Study Contact

Study Contact Backup

Study Locations

  • Singapore
      • Singapore, Singapore, 308433
      • Singapore, Singapore
      • Singapore, Singapore
        • Not yet recruiting
        • Changi General Hospital
        • Contact:
          • Clinical Research Coordinator
          • Phone Number: 6569365716
          • Email: ctru@cgh.com.sg
        • Contact:
        • Principal Investigator:
          • Tiing Leong Ang, Phd

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

  • Adult
  • Older Adult

Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Yes

Description

Inclusion Criteria:

Adult (40 - 80 years) Undergoing colonoscopy for screening, surveillance, or diagnostic indications. Complete colonoscopy with satisfactory Boston Bowel Prep Scale of 6 or higher. Provide informed consent to participate in the study

Exclusion Criteria:

Personal or family history of colorectal cancer Personal or family history of colonic polyposis syndromes Personal or family history of inflammatory bowel disease Prior colorectal surgery Contraindications to colonoscopy (intestinal obstruction, medical conditions that will make the risk of colonoscopy too high) Contraindications to polypectomy (ongoing anticoagulation / double antiplatelet therapy that cannot be stopped for the colonoscopy) Inability to give consent Incomplete colonoscopy/ Unable to retrieve specimen for pathology Poor bowel preparation (Boston Bowel Prep Scale <6) Pregnant Women

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

  • Primary Purpose: Screening
  • Allocation: Randomized
  • Interventional Model: Parallel Assignment
  • Masking: Single

Arms and Interventions

Participant Group / Arm
Intervention / Treatment
Active Comparator: AI-assisted colonoscopy
Device: usage of CADe system
A real-time Computer Aided Detection (CADe) system can help improve the detection of SSL versus a conventional colonoscopy (CC) using white light examination(WLE).
No Intervention: Conventional Colonoscopy
Conventional Colonoscopy using white light

What is the study measuring?

Primary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
SSL per colonoscopy (SPC) using White Light Endoscopy alone vs enhancement by CADe system.
Time Frame: up to a year
up to a year

Secondary Outcome Measures

Outcome Measure
Time Frame
1) Adenoma per colonoscopy (APC) using White Light Endoscopy alone vs enhancement by CADe system. 2) Polyp per colonoscopy (PPC) using White Light Endoscopy alone vs enhancement by CADe system. 3) Difference in the SPC, APC, PPC for each proceduralist
Time Frame: up to a year
up to a year

Collaborators and Investigators

This is where you will find people and organizations involved with this study.

Sponsor

National Healthcare Group, Singapore

Collaborators

Changi General Hospital
National University Health System, Singapore

Investigators

  • Study Chair: Joseph JY Sung, PHD, Nanyang Technological University

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

  • 1.Meester RGS, van Herk M, Lansdorp-Vogelaar I, et al. Prevalence and clinical features of sessile serrated polyps: a systematic review. Gastroenterology 2020;159:105-118.e25 2.Lui, R. N. et al. Prevalence and risk factors for sessile serrated lesions in an average risk colorectal cancer screening population. J. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 36, 1656-1662 (2021) 3.Sekiguchi M, Matsuda T Prevalence of serrated lesions, risk factors, and their association with synchronous advanced colorectal neoplasia in asymptomatic screened individuals. J Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2020 Nov;35(11):1938-1944 doi: 10.1111/jgh.15116. Epub 2020 Jun 10 4.Sung JJY, Chiu HM Third Asia-Pacific consensus recommendations on colorectal cancer screening and postpolypectomy surveillance. Gut. 2022 Nov;71(11):2152-2166. doi: 10.1136/gutjnl-2022-327377. Epub 2022 Aug 24 5.Song M, Emilsson L, Bozorg SR, et al. Risk of colorectal cancer incidence and mortality after polypectomy: a Swedish recordlinkage study. Lancet Gastroenterol Hepatol 2020;5:537-547. 6.Gao Q, Tsoi KK, Hirai HW, et al. Serrated polyps and the risk of synchronous colorectal advanced neoplasia: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Am J Gastroenterol. 2015; 110: 501-9. 7.He X, Hang D, Wu K, et al. Long-term Risk of Colorectal Cancer After Removal of Conventional Adenomas and Serrated Polyps. Gastroenterology. 2020; 158: 852-61. 8.Ng SC, Sung JJ. Association between serrated polyps and the risk of synchronous advanced colorectal neoplasia in average-risk individuals. Aliment Pharmacol Ther. 2015 Jan;41(1):108-15. doi: 10.1111/apt.13003. Epub 2014 Oct 22. PMID: 25339583. 9.David E F W M van Toledo et al, Serrated polyp detection and risk of interval post-colonoscopy colorectal cancer: a population-based study, The Lancet Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Volume 7, Issue 8, 2022, Pages 747-754 10.Repici A, Hassan C. Efficacy of Real-Time Computer-Aided Detection of Colorectal Neoplasia in a Randomized Trial. Gastroenterology. 2020 Aug;159(2)

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 (Actual)

May 21, 2026

Primary Completion (Estimated)

May 1, 2027

Study Completion (Estimated)

May 3, 2027

Study Registration Dates

First Submitted

June 10, 2026

First Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 10, 2026

First Posted (Actual)

June 16, 2026

Study Record Updates

Last Update Posted (Actual)

June 16, 2026

Last Update Submitted That Met QC Criteria

June 10, 2026

Last Verified

June 1, 2026

More Information

Terms related to this study

Keywords

Other Study ID Numbers

  • 2025-1940

Plan for Individual participant data (IPD)

Plan to Share Individual Participant Data (IPD)?

UNDECIDED

Drug and device information, study documents

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated drug product

No

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated device product

No

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.

Clinical Trials on Sessile Serrated Lesion

Clinical Trials on usage of CADe system

Search Similar Trials

Sponsors and Collaborators

Medical Conditions

Drug Interventions

CROs by country

CROs in Burundi

Conditions

Rare Diseases

Drug Interventions

Dietary Supplements

Sponsor/Collaborators

Locations

Subscribe