MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2995085185 · doi:10.1186/s13063-019-3918-y

ELEMENT TRIAL: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial on endoscopic ultrasound-guided biliary drainage of first intent with a lumen-apposing metal stent vs. endoscopic retrograde cholangio-pancreatography in the management of malignant distal biliary obstruction

2019· article· en· W2995085185 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Yen‐I Chen, Kashi Callichurn, Avijit Chatterjee, Étienne Désilets, Donnellan Fergal, Nauzer Forbes, S. Ian Gan, Sana Kenshil, Mouen A. Khashab, Rastislav Kunda, Eric Lam, Gary R. May, Rachid Mohamed, J. Mosko, Sarto C. Paquin, Anand V. Sahai, Gurpal Sandha, Christopher Teshima, Alan Barkun, Jeffrey Barkun, Ali Bessissow, Kristina Candido, Myriam Martel, Corey Miller, Kevin Waschke, George Zogopoulos, Clarence Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueTrials · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGallbladder and Bile Duct Disorders
Canadian institutionsRoyal Alexandra HospitalUniversity of AlbertaHôpital Charles-Le MoyneUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's HospitalSt. Paul's HospitalUniversity of CalgaryVancouver General HospitalUniversity of British ColumbiaMcGill University Health CentreUniversity of OttawaCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de MontréalUniversity of Alberta HospitalOttawa Hospital
FundersUniversity of TorontoUniversité de MontréalVrije Universiteit BrusselUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University Health CentreAmerican Society for Gastrointestinal EndoscopyMcGill UniversityUniversity of OttawaBoston Scientific CorporationUniversité de SherbrookeJohns Hopkins University
KeywordsMedicineEndoscopic ultrasoundStentRandomized controlled trialEndoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatographyClinical endpointSurgeryBiliary diseaseRadiologyPancreatitis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Endoscopic ultrasound guided-biliary drainage (EUS-BD) is a promising alternative to endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP); however, its growth has been limited by a lack of multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCT) and dedicated devices. A dedicated EUS-BD lumen- apposing metal stent (LAMS) has recently been developed with the potential to greatly facilitate the technique and safety of the procedure. We aim to compare a first intent approach with EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy with a dedicated biliary LAMS vs. standard ERCP in the management of malignant distal biliary obstruction. METHODS: The ELEMENT trial is a multicenter single-blinded RCT involving 130 patients in nine Canadian centers. Patients with unresectable, locally advanced, or borderline resectable malignant distal biliary obstruction meeting the inclusion and exclusion criteria will be randomized to EUS-choledochoduodenostomy using a LAMS or ERCP with traditional metal stent insertion in a 1:1 proportion in blocks of four. Patients with hilar obstruction, resectable cancer, or benign disease are excluded. The primary endpoint is the rate of stent dysfunction needing re-intervention. Secondary outcomes include technical and clinical success, interruptions in chemotherapy, rate of surgical resection, time to stent dysfunction, and adverse events. DISCUSSION: The ELEMENT trial is designed to assess whether EUS-guided choledochoduodenostomy using a dedicated LAMS is superior to conventional ERCP as a first-line endoscopic drainage approach in malignant distal biliary obstruction, which is an important and timely question that has not been addressed using an RCT study design. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry name: ClinicalTrials.gov. Registration number: NCT03870386. Date of registration: 03/12/2019.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.047
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: Protocol
Teacher disagreement score0.104
Threshold uncertainty score0.347

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.047
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0060.002
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.005
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0070.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1040.014

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.043
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTrialsSame topicGallbladder and Bile Duct DisordersFrench-language works237,207