ClinicalTrials.gg
RecruitingNCT05276791REMOVE-RCTUpdated Jun 29, 2026

EMR Versus ESD for Barrett's Neoplasia

An interventional study of EMR and ESD in Barretts Esophagus With Dysplasia, Barrett Adenocarcinoma and Esophageal Cancer, sponsored by St. Antonius Hospital. Recruiting at 6 sites in Netherlands. Open to participants aged 18 Years and older. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-06-29.

Sponsored by St. Antonius Hospital · Not applicable, Interventional, and Treatment

From the registry’s dates

  • Started Jan 2023; still recruiting 3 years 9 months later.
Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
331
Allocation
Randomized
Ages
18 Years and older
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Rationale:

The optimal technique for removal of visible dysplastic lesions in Barrett's esophagus remains controversial. Endoscopic mucosal resection (EMR) is safe, effective, easy to apply, and has been the most widely used technique since 2008. Endoscopic submucosal dissection (ESD) is a more controlled dissection method with potential improved efficacy, but at the cost of higher technical complexity.

Objective:

The investigators aim to compare EMR and ESD for removal of visible lesions in Barrett's esophagus.

Study design:

Randomized clinical trial

Study population:

Patients with Barrett's esophagus and a visible lesion with dysplasia and/or early cancer. Suspicion for submucosal invasion is an exclusion criterion.

Intervention:

Patients are randomized to receive either EMR or ESD, with follow-up and no ablation during 12 months after the resection.

Main study endpoint:

Primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with no evidence of residual or local recurrent neoplasia during 12 months follow-up after baseline.

02

Conditions studied

  • Barretts Esophagus With Dysplasia
  • Barrett Adenocarcinoma
  • Esophageal Cancer

Keywords

  • Barrett's esophagus
  • Esophagheal adenocarcinom
03

In context

Esophageal Neoplasms

1,873 studies on the registry are indexed under Esophageal Neoplasms; 501 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 331 is above the median of 58 across 1,347 interventional studies indexed under Esophageal Neoplasms.

Browse Esophageal Neoplasms studies →

Lead sponsor

St. Antonius Hospital is the lead sponsor of 97 studies on the registry; 28 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years and older
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients age: ≥ 18 years
  • Willingness to undergo both EMR or ESD
  • Ability to provide written, (approved by IRB) and understand the responsibilities of trial participation
  • BE with at least one visible lesion ("target lesion") with absence of signs of submucosal invasion on endoscopy, after evaluation by the adjudication committee
  • Multiple lesions are allowed as long as the lesions are considered eligible for endoscopic treatment. Only the target lesion is evaluated for the study
  • Prior endoscopic resection is allowed

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with visible lesions with suspicion of submucosal invasion based on assessment of the adjudication committee
  • Patients with HGD in at least one random , before inclusion (i.e. during endoscopy in the referring center \<3 months before imaging, or during imaging endoscopy)
  • History of esophageal surgery other than fundoplication
  • History of esophageal ablation therapy
  • In case of prior endoscopic resection, the target lesion located within 1 cm of the prior resection site
  • Uncontrolled coagulopathy with >2.0, thrombocytopenia with counts \< 50,000
  • Esophageal varix or varices
  • Subject has a known history of unresolved drug or alcohol dependency that would limit ability to comprehend or follow instructions related to , post-treatment instructions, or follow-up guidelines
  • \<2 years
Terms in these criteria, in plain language(5)

Underlined terms in the criteria open these too. Explained by clinicaltrials.gg, not part of the registry record. The study team decides who can take part.

Informed consent

Before you join, the study team explains what taking part involves — its purpose, what happens, the risks and possible benefits — and answers your questions, so you can decide freely. Consent is usually recorded on a form (the informed consent form, ICF) signed by you or, where the law allows, by someone legally authorised to decide for you.

You can keep asking questions during the study, you are told of new information that matters, and you can choose to leave at any time.

Biopsy and archival tissue

A biopsy takes a small piece of tissue to examine. “Archival tissue” is a sample already taken, for example at diagnosis, and kept by the hospital.

Whether a stored sample will do depends on when it was taken, how much there is and what the study needs. Ask whether the study accepts your stored sample or needs a new biopsy.

INR, PT and aPTT (clotting tests)

Blood tests of how long blood takes to clot. The INR is the prothrombin time (PT) put on a common scale; about 1 is usual for someone not taking a blood thinner.

Criteria often make an exception for people on a blood thinner such as warfarin, whose INR is raised on purpose.

Platelets

Blood cells that help blood clot. Too few raises the risk of bleeding and bruising. A usual adult range is about 150–400 × 10⁹/L (150,000–400,000 per µL); each lab has its own reference range.

Life expectancy

The study doctor’s estimate of how long someone is likely to live. Criteria use it so that people can stay in the study long enough for it to answer its question.

05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Treatment
Allocation
Randomized
Intervention model
Parallel assignment
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
331 participants (estimated)

Study arms

  • Active comparator
    Endoscopic submucosal dissection

    Other: ESD

  • Active comparator
    Endoscopic mucosal resection

    Other: EMR

Interventions

  • OtherEMR

    Endoscopic mucosal resection, according to standard care

  • OtherESD

    Endoscopic submucosal dissection, according to standard care

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Primary endpoint is the proportion of patients with no evidence of residual or local recurrent neoplasia during 12 months follow-up after baseline.

    Time frame: 12 months

Secondary outcomes

  1. Incidence of complications

    . Complications will be assessed on patient level (yes/no) and chi-square test will be used to compare the outcomes between the study arms. In the case \> 25% of patients have multiple complications, assessment will be performed on complication level (n per patient) using Poisson-regression analysis.

    Time frame: 12 months

  2. Procedure times

    a skewed continuous variable that will be compared using the Mann-Whitney U test.

    Time frame: 12 months

  3. Proportion of patients with endoscopically radical resection

    assessed during the ER endoscopy, a proportion that will be compared using the chi2 test or Fisher's exact if the number of patients in a single category is \<5.

    Time frame: 12 months

  4. The total number of ER endoscopies per patient

    This number will be compared using Poison regression analysis.

    Time frame: 12 months

  5. The proportion of patients that shows neoplastic progression

    This will be compared with a chi2 test or Fisher's exact if the number of patients in a single category is \<5, and this analyses will be stratified for moment of detection (i.e. at baseline or later during the study duration).

    Time frame: 12 months

  6. Cost-effectiveness

    Cost-effectiveness will be calculated by efficacy of both procedures (absence of residual or recurrent disease) divided by total costs in Euro associated with the procedures

    Time frame: 12 months

  7. Additional histopathologic evaluation may be performed to evaluate potential differences between the two techniques.

    Interobserver agreement between the two techniques will be evaluated with Cohen's kappa, as well as a subjective score on ease of assessment on a NRS score ranging from 0-10.

    Time frame: 12 months

07

Study locations

6 of 6 sites recruiting
08

References and documents

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

No publications or documents are linked to this record.

09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Jun 29, 2026, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT05276791
Lead sponsor
St. Antonius Hospital
Collaborators
University Medical Center Groningen, Erasmus Medical Center, UMC Utrecht, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Catharina Ziekenhuis Eindhoven
Responsible party
Sanne van Munster (Principal Investigator (Bas Weusten), St. Antonius Hospital) — Principal investigator
First posted
Mar 11, 2022
Start date
Jan 17, 2023
Primary completion
Dec 1, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Dec 1, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Jun 29, 2026

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Interested in this study?

Eligibility is decided by the study team. Share this record with your doctor or contact the team directly.

No contact was published for this record. The registry link below has the sponsor’s details.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion