Medical Information Only. Always consult your healthcare provider before enrolling in any clinical trial.

NCT06659055 · ClinicalTrials.gov registry record · NA

Bone Mineral Density Agreement Study Between EOSedge™ Versus Traditional DXA

A NA study of Healthy and Indicated for EOSedge Imaging, sponsored by Alphatec Spine.

Recruiting
Registry status
NA
Development phase
214
Enrollment target
4
Study locations

NCT06659055 is a NA study of Healthy and Indicated for EOSedge Imaging that is actively recruiting participants, run by Alphatec Spine. The registered enrollment target is 214 participants, below the 647-participant average among 1,090 other Healthy trials with a reported enrollment target (67% lower). The trial reports 4 study locations across 4 states.

View on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

View your shortlist →

The verdict

NCT06659055, a NA study of Healthy and Indicated for EOSedge Imaging, is actively recruiting participants, sponsored by Alphatec Spine.

RECRUITING
Registry status
NA
Development phase
214 participants
Enrollment target
4
Study locations

Study Summary

The purpose of this research is to collect medical imaging data to allow for the comparison of bone mineral density measurements from two different types of low-dose x-ray exams, EOSedge and conventional DXA. The main question it aims to answer is: Is there agreement between the calculated T-scores between the 2 different types of x-ray exams?

Interventions

  • RADIATION DXA Imaging
  • RADIATION EOSedge imaging

Study Locations (4)

Arizona

  • Honor Health - Phoenix

California

  • ATEC Carlsbad - Carlsbad

Tennessee

  • ATEC Mephis - Memphis

Virginia

  • University of Virginia - Charlottesville

Trial Details

FieldValue
Enrollment Target 214 participants
Start Date 2024-09-11
Est. Completion 2025-03
Phase NA

Sponsor

Alphatec Spine

7 total trials

What the Registry Record Tells You About NCT06659055

The ClinicalTrials.gov registry entry for NCT06659055 describes a study currently listed as recruiting, categorized as NA. The registered enrollment target is 214 participants, a figure that helps gauge the scale of data the investigators plan to collect, below the 647-participant average among 1,090 other Healthy trials with a reported enrollment target (67% lower). The listed sponsor is Alphatec Spine, which has 7 total studies on file at ClinicalTrials.gov.

The record links to 2 conditions, with Healthy appearing as the primary indexed condition, and to 2 interventions - of which DXA Imaging is the first listed.

NCT06659055 reports 4 study locations spanning 4 distinct geographic areas - top geographies include Arizona, California, Tennessee.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is clinical trial NCT06659055 about?

NCT06659055 is a clinical study titled "Bone Mineral Density Agreement Study Between EOSedge™ Versus Traditional DXA". The purpose of this research is to collect medical imaging data to allow for the comparison of bone mineral density measurements from two different types of low-dose x-ray exams, EOSedge and conventional DXA. The main question it aims to answer is: Is there agreement between the calculated T-scores...

What is the current status of trial NCT06659055?

This trial is currently recruiting. It is a NA study. The enrollment target is 214 participants. The study started on 2024-09-11. Estimated completion is 2025-03.

What conditions does trial NCT06659055 study?

This clinical trial studies the following conditions: Healthy, Indicated for EOSedge Imaging.

What interventions are being tested in trial NCT06659055?

The interventions under investigation include: DXA Imaging (RADIATION), EOSedge imaging (RADIATION).

Who is sponsoring clinical trial NCT06659055?

This trial is sponsored by Alphatec Spine, which has 7 total clinical trials registered on ClinicalTrials.gov.

Where is trial NCT06659055 being conducted?

This trial has 4 study locations across Arizona, California, Tennessee, Virginia. Contact the study sites directly through ClinicalTrials.gov for enrollment availability.

Similar trials for Healthy

Matched on the same primary condition, ranked to surface studies in the same phase first, then by recruiting status, no relevance scoring or editorial curation.

Data sourced from official public datasets. See our methodology for details. Retrieved and formatted by PlainTrial Editorial

Every figure on PlainTrial is rendered directly from the ClinicalTrials.gov registry, no number is typed in by an editor. This page mirrors this trial's own ClinicalTrials.gov registry record, live from the dataset. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error.