Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Dicentra Inc. | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) often lead to the overuse of empiric antibiotics, risking inappropriate treatment and contributing to antimicrobial resistance. This randomized, multi-center, investigator-blinded clinical trial is the first global head-to-head comparison of molecular diagnostic testing (Polymerase Chain Reaction : PCR) versus conventional culture and sensitivity (C&S) for managing cUTIs in adults.
Conducted across six U.S. clinical sites, the study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of PCR-guided treatment relative to C&S-guided care. Eligible adult patients were randomized 1:1 into two diagnostic arms-PCR or C&S-after providing informed consent. Urine samples were collected before randomization, tested by both methods, but clinicians remained blinded to the comparator results to avoid bias. Treatment decisions were based only on the assigned test results.
Urine was collected at baseline (Day 1) and at end-of-study (Day 28). Samples were processed centrally: the PCR method (DocLab UTM 2.0) detected 28 uropathogens and 16 antibiotic resistance gene classes; C&S testing quantified bacterial loads and assessed antimicrobial susceptibility using standard thresholds (≥10⁵ CFU/mL).
The primary endpoint was the number of patients in each arm achieving a Favorable Clinical Outcome (FCl) at Day 28, defined as either:
Secondary endpoints included:
Study Overview:
Complicated urinary tract infections (cUTIs) remain a significant clinical challenge, often prompting empiric antibiotic use that may result in inappropriate therapy, antimicrobial overuse, and treatment failure. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical utility of molecular diagnostics (PCR) versus Conventional culture and sensitivity (C&S) methods in managing cUTIs, with the goal of identifying more effective patient management strategies.
This was a randomized, parallel-group, investigator-blinded, multi-center clinical trial conducted across six sites in the United States. Adults meeting all inclusion and no exclusion criteria who provided informed consent were randomized 1:1 into two arms: PCR-guided therapy and C&S-guided therapy. Each participant provided a urine sample before randomization, which was tested using both PCR and C&S. However, treating investigators remained blinded to the comparator test results throughout the study to ensure unbiased clinical decision-making.
Study Protocol:
Urine specimens were collected using a clean-catch midstream method at two time points: Day 1 (baseline) and Day 28 (end of study, EOS). Samples were refrigerated at 2-8°C and processed at a central lab. All specimens were split for parallel testing using:
Blinding and Treatment Allocation:
Participants were treated based exclusively on the test result assigned by randomization (PCR or C&S). Comparator test results were withheld from clinicians until after the study concluded.
The primary endpoint was the number (and percentage) of subjects in each study arm with favorable clinical outcomes (FCl) at the EOS visit. The FCl was defined as a patient's clinical response, assessed by the treating investigator, indicating either clinical improvement or cure. Clinical improvement was defined as the resolution of at least one symptom of cUTI present at baseline, absence of new cUTI symptoms, and/or avoidance of parenteral antibiotic therapy following randomization. Clinical cure was defined as the complete resolution of all acute signs and symptoms of cUTI present at baseline, to the extent that no further antimicrobial therapy (either IV or oral) was required for the treatment of the cUTI.
The secondary endpoint included several assessments:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| PCR Arm | Other | Treatment guided by the PCR results |
|
| C&S Arm | Other | Treatment guided by the C&S results |
|
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Treatment guided by the PCR results | Diagnostic Test | Patients receive treatment prescribed by a blinded clinician, based solely on the PCR diagnostic results |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Favorable Clinical Outcomes (FCl) | The number (and percentage) of subjects in each study arm with favorable clinical outcomes (FCl) at the EOS visit. The FCl was defined as a patient's clinical response, assessed by the treating investigator, indicating either clinical improvement or cure. Clinical improvement was defined as the resolution of at least one symptom of cUTI present at baseline, absence of new cUTI symptoms, and/or avoidance of parenteral antibiotic therapy following randomization. Clinical cure was defined as the complete resolution of all acute signs and symptoms of cUTI present at baseline, to the extent that no further antimicrobial therapy (either IV or oral) was required for the treatment of the cUTI. | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Microbiological Eradication | Number (and percentage) of subjects with microbiological eradication at the EOS, defined as achieving a quantitative urine culture at the EOS indicating a reduction of all uro-pathogens present at baseline to <10^5 colony forming unit per milliliter (CFU/mL) and the absence of baseline pathogens detected by EOS urine PCR (Cq > 33) | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Roel Chavez | Doc Lab Inc | Study Chair |
| Thomas K Huard, PhD | MED-US Consulting, LLC | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Silicon Valley Medical Development | San Jose | California | 95124 | United States | ||
| Albany Urology Clinic & Surgery Center |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Between July 2023 and April 2024, 824 patients were screened, and 773 were randomized with informed consent. Both PCR and C&S testing were performed for all enrolled participants (n = 773) before randomization into one of the two study arms
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | PCR Arm | Treatment guided by the PCR results |
| FG001 | C&S Arm | Treatment guided by the C&S results |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot_SAP_ICF | Yes | Yes | Yes | Study Protocol, Statistical Analysis Plan, and Informed Consent Form | Jun 23, 2023 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Treatment guided by the C&S results | Diagnostic Test | Patients receive treatment prescribed by a blinded investigator (clinician), based solely on the C&S diagnostic results. |
|
| Treating Investigator Satisfaction Score | Subjective measurement of treating investigator satisfaction score through a questionnaire (5 questions) at EOS, evaluated factors such as (1) result availability/timeliness, (2) clarity of result interpretation, (3) clinical decision-making utility, (4) overall test satisfaction, and (5) perceived impact on patient outcomes versus comparator. Scale information Score Interpretation: Each item scored 1-5; higher scores reflect greater diagnostic and therapeutic value. Total score meaning:
| at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
| Turnaround Time | Comparison of turnaround time between molecular diagnostic procedures and conventional diagnostic | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
| Overall Agreeability | Overall agreeability between the diagnostic results generated by PCR versus C&S as assessed by discordant analysis | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
| Favorable Clinical Outcome of Patients With Discordant Results | Assessment of the favorable clinical outcome of patients with discordant results [PCR(+), CS(-) and PCR(-), CS(+)] Patients with discordant results [PCR(+), CS(-) and PCR(-), CS(+)] were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis and their outcome is presented here as a secondary analysis | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
| Albany |
| Georgia |
| 31707 |
| United States |
| Augusta Urology Associates | Evans | Georgia | 30809 | United States |
| Colquitt Regional Medical Center | Moultrie | Georgia | 31768 | United States |
| Phoenix Urology of St Joseph | Saint Joseph | Missouri | 64506 | United States |
| Norman Urology Associates | Norman | Oklahoma | 73071 | United States |
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | PCR Arm | Treatment guided by the PCR results |
| BG001 | C&S Arm | Treatment guided by the C&S results |
| BG002 | Total | Total of all reporting groups |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants | Participants | No |
| |||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants | No |
| |||||||||||||||
| Race and Ethnicity Not Collected | Race and Ethnicity were not collected from any participant. | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | Favorable Clinical Outcomes (FCl) | The number (and percentage) of subjects in each study arm with favorable clinical outcomes (FCl) at the EOS visit. The FCl was defined as a patient's clinical response, assessed by the treating investigator, indicating either clinical improvement or cure. Clinical improvement was defined as the resolution of at least one symptom of cUTI present at baseline, absence of new cUTI symptoms, and/or avoidance of parenteral antibiotic therapy following randomization. Clinical cure was defined as the complete resolution of all acute signs and symptoms of cUTI present at baseline, to the extent that no further antimicrobial therapy (either IV or oral) was required for the treatment of the cUTI. | EOS Population: This group included all enrolled patients who completed the study procedures, including the treating investigators' evaluation. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Microbiological Eradication | Number (and percentage) of subjects with microbiological eradication at the EOS, defined as achieving a quantitative urine culture at the EOS indicating a reduction of all uro-pathogens present at baseline to <10^5 colony forming unit per milliliter (CFU/mL) and the absence of baseline pathogens detected by EOS urine PCR (Cq > 33) | EOS Population: This group included all enrolled patients who completed the study procedures, including the treating investigators' evaluation. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Treating Investigator Satisfaction Score | Subjective measurement of treating investigator satisfaction score through a questionnaire (5 questions) at EOS, evaluated factors such as (1) result availability/timeliness, (2) clarity of result interpretation, (3) clinical decision-making utility, (4) overall test satisfaction, and (5) perceived impact on patient outcomes versus comparator. Scale information Score Interpretation: Each item scored 1-5; higher scores reflect greater diagnostic and therapeutic value. Total score meaning:
| EOS Population: This group included all enrolled patients who completed the study procedures, including the treating investigators' evaluation. | Posted | Mean | Standard Error | score on a scale (1-25) | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Turnaround Time | Comparison of turnaround time between molecular diagnostic procedures and conventional diagnostic | EOS Population: This group included all enrolled patients who completed the study procedures, including the treating investigators' evaluation. | Posted | Mean | Full Range | hours | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Overall Agreeability | Overall agreeability between the diagnostic results generated by PCR versus C&S as assessed by discordant analysis | EOS Population: This group included all enrolled patients who completed the study procedures, including the treating investigators' evaluation. | Posted | Number | percentage | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Favorable Clinical Outcome of Patients With Discordant Results | Assessment of the favorable clinical outcome of patients with discordant results [PCR(+), CS(-) and PCR(-), CS(+)] Patients with discordant results [PCR(+), CS(-) and PCR(-), CS(+)] were excluded from the primary endpoint analysis and their outcome is presented here as a secondary analysis | Patients with discordant results PCR Arm : PCR(+), CS(-) & C&S Arm : PCR(-), CS(+) Note: PCR Arm: No patients were identified as PCR(-), CS(+). C&S Arm: A total of 68 patients were PCR(+), CS(-). Their clinical outcomes were not reported in this study, as they were managed with empiric therapy rather than pathogen-directed treatment. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | at End Of Study (EOS) visit (Day 28) |
|
|
Day 1 (baseline) and Day 28 (end of study, EOS)
All events will be managed promptly and reported in compliance with all applicable regulations and guidelines.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | PCR Arm | Treatment guided by the PCR results | 0 | 236 | 0 | 236 | 0 | 236 |
| EG001 | C&S Arm | Treatment guided by the C&S results | 0 | 232 | 0 | 232 | 0 | 232 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Roel Chavez | Doc Lab Inc | 971 570-4008 | roel@doclabinc.com |
| Jun 13, 2025 |
| Prot_SAP_ICF_001.pdf |
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D014552 | Urinary Tract Infections |
| D004194 | Disease |
| D000095384 | Pathologic Complete Response |
| D006967 | Hypersensitivity |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D007239 | Infections |
| D014570 | Urologic Diseases |
| D052776 | Female Urogenital Diseases |
| D005261 | Female Urogenital Diseases and Pregnancy Complications |
| D000091642 | Urogenital Diseases |
| D052801 | Male Urogenital Diseases |
| D010335 | Pathologic Processes |
| D013568 | Pathological Conditions, Signs and Symptoms |
| D018450 | Disease Progression |
| D020969 | Disease Attributes |
| D007154 | Immune System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| Between 18 and 65 years |
|
| >=65 years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Title | Denominators | Categories | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity % |
| |||||
| Specificity % |
|
|