Plain-English translation of NCT06057350 on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Source last updated · Translation generated · How we translate trials
This study doesn't follow the usual testing phases — it may be an observational study or a different type of research.
This study is testing whether a newer, less invasive endoscopic procedure called endoscopic full-thickness resection (eFTR) can be as effective and safer than traditional surgery for treating early colon cancer that wasn't completely removed during an initial endoscopy. The trial will compare how well each approach works, what side effects patients experience, and how much each costs. By enrolling about 304 patients, researchers hope to understand which option gives the best balance of safety, effectiveness, and quality of life for people in this situation.
When early colon cancer isn't completely removed during a colonoscopy, patients typically need surgery to remove the rest of the cancer. However, surgery is a major procedure with significant recovery time and potential complications. This trial exists to see whether a newer endoscopic technique—which uses a colonoscope rather than surgical cuts—can achieve the same cancer control with fewer side effects and a faster recovery.
You likely qualify if…
You likely don't qualify if…
You would be randomly assigned to receive either the newer endoscopic full-thickness resection procedure (performed through a colonoscope) or traditional surgical resection (performed with open, laparoscopic, or robotic surgery). If you receive the endoscopic procedure, it would be performed during a colonoscopy. If you receive surgery, you would follow standard surgical protocols. After treatment, you would be monitored for side effects in the first 30 days and then followed for 3 years to check for cancer recurrence and compare the long-term effectiveness and safety of both approaches.
AI-generated summary from trial data · Jun 27, 2026 · Not medical advice
Norway
Poland