Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT07584486

Development of a New Simplified Tool to Predict LNPCPs Histology and Assess the Risk of Submucosal Invasive Cancer. The Colorectal Regular-Irregular Score

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common malignancy worldwide and the second leading cause of cancer related death. It can be prevented by endoscopic detection and complete resection of colorectal polyps. The JNET (Japanese NBI Expert Team) classification is clinically useful to predict the histology of large non-pedunculated colorectal polyps (LNPCPs) using narrow-band imaging at endoscopy. Japanese experts can reliably predict histology including the presence and depth of submucosal invasive cancer (SMI) using JNET with accuracy >87%. On the other hand, the International Evaluation of Endoscopy classification-JNET (IEE-JNET) group demonstrated that ESGE and JGES endoscopists had sufficient accuracy for JNET 1 (93.0%) but insufficient accuracy for JNET 2A/B and 3 (respectively 62.1%, 55.1% and 85.1%). Reliably distinguishing between JNET 2A, 2B and 3 has a profound clinical relevance, since JNET 2A lesions can safely be resected using pEMR whereas JNET 2B lesions should be resected en-bloc (EMR or ESD) due to the increased risk of cancer and JNET 3 lesions are preferably treated with surgery due to the high risk of deeply invasive carcinoma and the necessity of lymph node resection.

This study aims to validate a new simplified score, the Colorectal Regular-Irregular Score (CRIS) to fulfill the urgent need for a more effective and easier to use tool to predict LNPCPs histology. CRIS is a simplification of the JNET score which is mainly used by Japanese endoscopists or experts, recent evidence suggests its accuracy when used in everyday endoscopy in the Western world is insufficient. The investigators aim to compare JNET with CRIS for LNPCPs histology prediction amongst Western endoscopists using both original JNET interpretation and a clinically relevant approach.

The study consists of three work packages (WPs):

Work package one involves an expert online study where twelve expert endoscopists will evaluate 32 high-quality images of colorectal polyps using both JNET and CRIS classifications. Work package two involves an image/video-based online study where non-expert participants will be randomly assigned to rate images and videos using either JNET or CRIS, with performance re-evaluated after three months. Work package three involves a clinical study in a live endoscopy environment where non-expert endoscopists will participate in a randomized controlled trial assessing 10 colorectal polyps using either JNET or CRIS.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Age range

18 year and older

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Interventional

Phase

Not applicable

Primary location

UZ Gent

Ghent, 9000, Belgium

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Consenting Endoscopists of varying abilities and grades (endoscopist)
  • Endoscopists who did not previously encounter the score (endoscopist)
  • LNPCPs detected or referred for resection (patient)

Exclusion criteria

  • Endoscopist does not consent to inclusion (endoscopist)
  • Video of inadequate quality as per opinion of the principal investigator
  • Endoscopist does not undergo learning intervention (endoscopist)
  • Patient does not consent to data collection for the study (patient)

Treatment and study plan

Learning tool (CRIS/JNET)

Other

Participants will follow a 5-minute learning video (intervention) on CRIS and later for JNET.

Learning tool (JNET/CRIS)

Other

Participants will follow a 5-minute learning video (intervention) on JNET and later for CRIS.

Primary outcomes

  1. Diagnostic Accuracy of CRIS Classification for Submucosal Invasive Carcinoma (Sensitivity, Specificity, and Overall Accuracy)

    Time frame: Immediately after 5-minute training and rating of 32 images (approximately 1 hour per participant)

    Sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic accuracy of the CRIS classification for predicting submucosal invasive carcinoma compared with histopathological evaluation (reference standard). Accuracy is calculated as the proportion of correct classifications (true positives + true negatives) divided by total assessments. Results will be reported with 95% confidence intervals.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Diagnostic Accuracy of CRIS Versus JNET Among Expert Endoscopists (Sensitivity, Specificity, Overall Accuracy)

    Time frame: At completion of expert image rating (approximately 30 minutes per expert)

    Comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic accuracy between CRIS and JNET classifications among 12 expert endoscopists rating 32 polyp images. Accuracy calculated as proportion of correct histopathology predictions. Results reported with 95% confidence intervals.

  2. Diagnostic Accuracy of CRIS Versus JNET Across All Participant Categories (Sensitivity, Specificity, Overall Accuracy)

    Time frame: Through study completion, an average of 3 years

    Comparison of sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic accuracy between CRIS and JNET classifications across all participant categories (experts, consultants, trainees, medical students, endoscopy nurses). Accuracy calculated as proportion of correct histopathology predictions using generalized linear mixed model analysis.

  3. Change in Diagnostic Accuracy From Baseline to 3-Month Follow-up for CRIS Versus JNET (Sensitivity, Specificity, Overall Accuracy)

    Time frame: 3 months after initial assessment

    Change in sensitivity, specificity, and overall diagnostic accuracy from immediate post-training assessment to 3-month delayed assessment for participants using CRIS versus JNET. Reported as absolute change in accuracy with 95% confidence intervals. A smaller decrease indicates better retention of classification skills.

  4. Inter-observer Agreement for Polyp Classification Using CRIS Versus JNET (Fleiss' Kappa Coefficient)

    Time frame: At completion of baseline image assessment (approximately 1 hour per participant)

    Inter-observer agreement among non-expert endoscopists for polyp classification using CRIS versus JNET, measured using Fleiss' kappa coefficient. Values interpreted as: <0.20 poor, 0.21-0.40 fair, 0.41-0.60 moderate, 0.61-0.80 substantial, 0.81-1.00 almost perfect agreement.

  5. Correlation Between Proposed Endoscopic Treatment and CRIS/JNET Classification (Percentage Agreement)

    Time frame: At completion of baseline image/video assessment (approximately 1 hour per participant)

    Percentage of cases where the proposed endoscopic treatment (piecemeal EMR, en-bloc EMR/ESD, or surgical referral) aligns with the guideline-recommended treatment based on CRIS or JNET classification. Higher agreement indicates the classification effectively guides treatment selection.

  6. Change in CRIS/JNET Diagnostic Accuracy Following 5-Minute Structured Learning Intervention (Pre-Post Difference in Overall Accuracy)

    Time frame: Immediately before and immediately after 5-minute learning video intervention (within a single 1-hour session)

    Change in overall diagnostic accuracy from pre-intervention baseline to immediately post-intervention for CRIS and JNET classifications. Reported as absolute difference in accuracy percentage with 95% confidence intervals. The CRIS/JNET classification uses a scale where accuracy ranges from 0% (no correct classifications) to 100% (all classifications correct), with higher scores indicating better diagnostic performance.

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

David J Tate

CONTACT

[email protected]

+3293321063

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

University Hospital, Ghent

Other

Registry information

Acronym: CRIS

Important dates

Study start
2026
Primary completion
2028
Study completion
2028
First posted
May 13, 2026
Registry last updated
May 13, 2026

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.