SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “superior sagittal sinus”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

188 records · Page 11Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Effectiveness of Mobile-Delivered Exercise and Yoga Programs on Depressive Symptom Reduction in Employees: Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mental health challenges such as stress and depression are prevalent among employees. Mobile health platforms that deliver exercise or yoga interventions offer a promising approach to improve mental health outcomes in this population. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the effectiveness of 12-session adaptive moderate-intensity exercise and yoga programs delivered via a motion-detecting digital platform in reducing stress and depressive symptoms among employees. METHODS: This was an unblinded, 3-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial conducted at Seoul National University Bundang Hospital and Boramae Medical Center between November 2023 and January 2024. Eligible participants were full-time employees. Seventy-five participants were randomly assigned to an exercise, a yoga, or a cognitive behavioral therapy-based self-care control group using computer-generated randomization. The exercise and yoga groups engaged in motion-detecting, adaptive physical activity training, whereas the control group accessed mobile-based, self-directed stress management educational materials. The intervention was largely automated, with no individualized therapeutic guidance provided. Allocation was concealed until trial entry. All recruitment and outcome assessments were conducted in person at the hospitals. The primary outcomes were perceived stress and depressive symptoms, whereas the secondary outcomes included posttraumatic stress, insomnia severity, cognitive stress response, occupational stress, and burnout. Physiological outcomes were assessed using heart rate variability and electroencephalography. Measurements were collected at baseline, immediately after the intervention, and at 4-week follow-up. Data were analyzed using a multivariate linear model to evaluate the main effects of time, group, and time×group interactions. RESULTS: Of the 75 randomized participants (exercise: n=24, 32%; yoga: n=25, 33.3%; and control: n=26, 34.7%), 71 (94.7%) who completed at least 9 of the 12 sessions (≥40 min each) were included in the outcome analysis (exercise: n=21, 29.5%; yoga: n=24, 33.8%; and control: n=26, 36.6%). For the coprimary outcomes, the group×time interaction for depressive symptoms (Patient Health Questionnaire-9) approached but did not reach the Bonferroni-corrected threshold (F4,136=2.71; P=.03; adjusted α=.025); however, planned pairwise comparisons revealed significantly greater improvement in the yoga group compared to the control group at 4-week follow-up (β=-3.67; adjusted P<.001). For the Perceived Stress Scale, the interaction was not significant (P=.29), although a significant main effect of time (P<.001) indicated overall stress reduction across all groups. For secondary outcomes, a significant group×time interaction was found for the Cognitive Stress Responses Scale (P=.003), indicating differential trajectories of improvement. The yoga group showed a consistent linear decrease, whereas the exercise group showed immediate but less sustained gains. CONCLUSIONS: Digitally delivered adaptive yoga programs demonstrated superior and sustained improvements in depressive symptoms and Cognitive Stress Responses Scale scores compared with the active cognitive behavioral therapy-based self-care control group. However, the exercise program showed more modest and less sustained effects, warranting further investigation using larger samples.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Empirical Meropenem Versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Critically Ill Adults With Sepsis: Feasibility of a Randomised Trial.

BACKGROUND: Meropenem and piperacillin/tazobactam are commonly used empirical antibiotics in critically ill adults with sepsis, but whether one is superior to the other is uncertain. METHODS: The Empirical Meropenem versus Piperacillin/Tazobactam for Adult Patients with Sepsis (EMPRESS) trial is an ongoing investigator-initiated, randomised, open-label, adaptive clinical trial with an integrated feasibility phase comparing empirical treatment with meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis. The integrated feasibility phase enrolled 200 participants across 10 intensive care units (ICUs) in Denmark between 28 June and 12 December 2025. Five pre-specified feasibility criteria were evaluated; if all feasibility criteria were met, the trial would proceed unaltered, whereas failure to meet one or more criteria would require intervention and re-evaluation. RESULTS: We randomised 200 of 284 screened patients (70.4%). The median age was 70 years (interquartile range (IQR): 60-77), 65.5% were males. At randomisation, 80.0% received vasopressors or inotropes, and 43.5% were on invasive mechanical ventilation. Four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met: time to completion of the feasibility phase (5.5 months vs. threshold < 12.0 months), recruitment proportion (70.4% vs. threshold ≥ 50.0%), proportion of participants without consent to the continued collection of data (2.5% vs. threshold < 5.0%) and protocol adherence (81.0% vs. threshold ≥ 75.0%). The proportion of participants with timely primary outcome data availability (30-day mortality) within 45 days was 85.5% and below the pre-specified threshold of ≥ 95.0%. The proportions were low in the first 3 months (33.3%, 22.2% and 30.8%, respectively), increasing to 95.8% in the last month of the feasibility phase. All-cause mortality at 30 days was 30.5%, and specific serious adverse reactions occurred in 4.0% of participants. CONCLUSIONS: In this integrated feasibility evaluation of the EMPRESS trial comparing empirical meropenem versus piperacillin/tazobactam in critically ill adults with sepsis, four of five pre-specified feasibility criteria were met. The unmet criterion, timely primary outcome data availability, improved substantially during the feasibility phase. We consider the trial feasible and will proceed without modifications. EDITORIAL COMMENT: This feasibility study assessed recruitment, randomised allocation and data collection for the multicentre EMPRESS trial. For adaptive trials on trial platforms, careful interim checking of trial design functions is an important and necessary process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials Information System EUCT number: 2023-509703-33-00; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT06184659; Universal Trial Number: U1111-1301-6379.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

[Exploring the mechanism underlying the efficacy differences of "Tiaojing Cuyun Acupuncture"for premature ovarian failure based on vaginal microbiota structure].

OBJECTIVE: To observe the efficacy of "Tiaojing Cuyun Acupuncture" combined with hormone replacement therapy in the treatment of premature ovarian failure (POF), and to investigate differences in vaginal microbiota among patients with different therapeutic responses, thereby preliminarily exploring the mechanism underlying efficacy differences. METHODS: Ninety-eight patients with POF were randomly divided into an observation group (49 cases, 1 case was eliminated)and a control group (49 cases, 1 case dropped out). The control group was treated with hormone replacement therapy with Femoston, one tablet each time, once daily. On the basis of the control group, the observation group was additionally treated with "Tiaojing Cuyun Acupuncture". Acupoint group 1 included Baihui (GV20), Zhongwan (CV12), Guanyuan (CV4), and bilateral Tianshu (ST25), Zigong (EX-CA1), Dahe (KI12), Zusanli (ST36), Sanyinjiao (SP6), and Taichong (LR3). Acupoint group 2 included Baihui (GV20), bilateral Shenshu (BL23), Ciliao (BL32), and Taixi (KI3). The two acupoint groups were used alternately, beginning with acupoint group 1. Treatment was administered once every other day, three times per week.Both groups were treated for three menstrual cycles. Serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH),estradiol (E2), and anti-M ü llerian hormone (AMH) levels on days 3-5 of the menstrual cycle were measured before and after treatment in the two groups. Self-rating anxiety scale (SAS) scores were assessed before and after treatment, and clinical efficacy was evaluated in the two groups. Five effective patients (G0 subgroup) and five ineffective patients (G1 subgroup)were randomly selected from each group, and their vaginal microbiota structure was analyzed using 16S rRNA sequencing. RESULTS: After treatment, FSH levels in both groups were lower than those before treatment (P<0.05); SAS scores in both groups were lower than those before treatment (P<0.05), and the observation group had lower SAS score than the control group (P<0.05). The total effective rate was 77.1% (37/48) in the observation group, which was higher than 56.3% (27/48) in the control group (P<0.05). Vaginal microbiota analysis showed that at the phylum level, the relative abundance of Firmicutes in the G0 subgroup of the control group was higher than that in the G1 subgroup, while the relative abundances of Bacteroidetes, Actinobacteria and Proteobacteria were lowed in the G0 subgroup. In contrast, the observation group exhibited an opposite trend: the G0 subgroup had lower Firmicutes abundance but higher abundances of Actinobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Proteobacteria compared with the G1 subgroup. At the family and genus levels, Bifidobacterium was enriched in the G0 subgroups of both groups, whereas Lactobacillus predominated in the G1 subgroups. The G0 subgroup of the control group showed higher abundance of Gardnerella, while both Lactobacillus and Gardnerella were concurrently elevated in the G1 subgroup of the observation group. Additionally, in the observation group indicated that Clostridiales and Rikenellaceae were significantly more abundant in the G0 subgroup than in the G1 subgroup (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: The "Tiaojing Cuyun Acupuncture" combined with hormone replacement therapy is superior to hormone replacement therapy alone in improving anxiety. There are differences in vaginal microbiota structure among patients with different theraputic efficacy, suggesting that the vaginal microecological environment may be involved in the mechanism of treatment response in POF.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of lavender oil preparation silexan on different symptoms of major depression - results from a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Major depressive disorder (MDD) is characterized by depressed mood, anhedonia, and loss of energy, which can be accompanied by associated symptoms and co-morbidities. Psychiatric scales such as the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS) must account for the complex nature of depression. METHODS: The MADRS total score change between baseline and week 8 was the primary outcome measure in a randomized, double-blind clinical trial investigating the antidepressant efficacy of 8 weeks' treatment with silexan compared to sertraline and placebo in patients with mild or moderate MDD. We report on a pre-planned, exploratory analysis of the individual MADRS items. Treatment effects were assessed using analyses of covariance with baseline adjustment, based on an estimand strategy. RESULTS: 498 subjects (silexan 170, sertraline 171, placebo 157) were treated and analyzed. After 8 weeks, silexan was superior to placebo for 5 out of the 9 MADRS items analyzed ("apparent sadness", "reported sadness", "reduced appetite", "concentration difficulties", "lassitude"; P < .05) and showed clinically important adjusted mean value differences >0.2 points for 7 out of the 9 items. Item-level results for silexan and sertraline were mainly comparable. CONCLUSIONS: Silexan had a strong over-all antidepressant effect, with the most pronounced improvements affecting the cardinal symptoms of depression. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT2020-000688-22 first entered on 12/08/2020. Significance statement Patients with depressive disorders can show many different symptoms. To better characterize the clinical action of an antidepressant, it is therefore important to analyze not only the overall value of a depression scale but also the individual items that describe these symptoms. Silexan is a preparation from lavender oil whose antidepressant effect has been proven in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled 8-week study in patients with mild or moderate major depressive disorder. Based on the individual items of the Montgomery Åsberg Depression Rating Scale that was used as the main outcome for efficacy, we found in an exploratory, hypothesis-generating analysis that silexan had a rather broad antidepressant effect in the participants of our study, with potentially clinically meaningful advantages over placebo for 7 out of the 9 individual items investigated. This applied in particular to the main symptoms of depression, namely sadness and lassitude. Our single-item analysis thus helps to understand the antidepressant effects of silexan in more detail. Significant outcomes In patients with mild to moderate major depressive disorder, lavender oil preparation silexan has a clinical profile similar to that of the selective serotonin re-uptake inhibitor sertraline based on an item-level analysis of the Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale (MADRS). Silexan has a significant antidepressant effect that includes an alleviation of depressed mood, anhedonia, and loss of energy, the cardinal symptoms of depression. The broad improvement of symptoms of depression could not be explained by the proven anxiolytic efficacy silexan alone but indicates an independent, direct antidepressant effect. The present item-level analysis provides valuable and detailed additional insights into the therapeutic profiles of silexan and sertraline and may help clinicians to tailor antidepressant treatment to the specific symptoms of a patient. Limitations For item-level analyses of the MADRS, no validated thresholds for the assessment of the clinical importance of changes over time have been defined, taking into account that different items may have different thresholds. Even though our analyses were pre-defined, they were exploratory and did not include studywise type I error level control. Their generalizability beyond the study population is therefore limited.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ibuprofen versus acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in pediatric populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis of their efficacy.

UNLABELLED: Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the most widely used analgesics in pediatric practice for the management of acute mild-to-moderate pain. Despite their widespread use, the comparative analgesic efficacy of these two agents in children remains a subject of ongoing debate, with existing evidence largely derived from heterogeneous clinical settings and small individual trials. Therefore, this study aimed to systematically review and meta-analyze randomized controlled trials comparing the analgesic efficacy of ibuprofen versus acetaminophen in pediatric populations with acute mild-to-moderate pain. A systematic literature search was conducted up to May 2026 in PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. The review was conducted and reported in accordance with the PRISMA-Children and Adolescents (PRISMA-C) 2026 reporting guideline. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials comparing ibuprofen with acetaminophen in children and adolescents (defined as individuals aged 0 to < 18 years) with acute pain, reporting at least one extractable efficacy outcome. Continuous outcomes were synthesized as standardized mean differences (Hedges' g) using random-effects models; dichotomous outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2 tool and certainty of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE framework. Eight randomized controlled trials enrolling 1325 participants were included. Three pediatric trials contributed to the primary continuous pain outcome meta-analysis (n = 196 analyzable participants), yielding a pooled SMD of - 0.28 (95% CI - 0.57 to 0.00; p = 0.052; I2 = 0%), indicating a small effect favoring ibuprofen that did not reach conventional statistical significance. Given the small number of contributing studies (k = 3), the I2 statistic should be interpreted with caution as it has limited power to detect heterogeneity in this context. For the dichotomous pain freedom outcome (2 trials, n = 114), no significant difference was observed (pooled RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.53-1.99; p = 0.93; I2 = 0%). A prespecified sensitivity analysis including an adult soft-tissue injury trial attenuated the pooled effect toward the null (SMD - 0.15, 95% CI - 0.38 to 0.09; p = 0.23; I2 = 36.6%). Narrative synthesis of additional studies generally demonstrated comparable analgesic efficacy between the two agents across postoperative and outpatient pediatric settings. The overall certainty of evidence was rated as low for both primary outcomes, primarily due to imprecision and indirectness. CONCLUSION: Current evidence from randomized controlled trials does not demonstrate a superiority of ibuprofen over acetaminophen for acute mild-to-moderate pain management in children. Both agents appear to provide clinically meaningful analgesia across heterogeneous pediatric pain settings. The clinical choice between agents should be guided by individual patient factors, including contraindications to NSAIDs, the inflammatory nature of the pain etiology, and patient-specific characteristics. The low certainty of evidence underscores the need for adequately powered, methodologically rigorous trials to definitively establish the comparative efficacy of these two analgesics in the pediatric population. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Ibuprofen and acetaminophen are the two most widely used non-opioid analgesics for acute mild-to-moderate pain in children, and both are recommended as first-line agents by major international guidelines. • Prior meta-analyses in mixed pediatric-adult populations have suggested a modest analgesic advantage of ibuprofen over acetaminophen, but pediatric-specific evidence has remained limited and methodologically heterogeneous. WHAT IS NEW: • This systematic review and meta-analysis, restricted to randomized controlled trials in pediatric populations, found that ibuprofen showed a small effect favoring pain reduction compared with acetaminophen (SMD - 0.28, p = 0.052), although this did not reach conventional statistical significance. • The analgesic advantage of ibuprofen may be more pronounced in pain etiologies with a significant inflammatory component (e.g., fractures). At the same time, both agents appear broadly equivalent in most other acute pediatric pain settings, supporting individualized analgesic selection based on clinical context and patient-specific factors.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to mental health services in England (the ODDESSI Trial): a multisite cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Open Dialogue is a person-centred, transdiagnostic model of mental health care that emphasises continuity, therapeutic relationships, and collaboration with the service user's social network. Open Dialogue is a service-wide approach to care involving network meetings with the service user, members of their social network, and usually two practitioners who support the network throughout the duration of care. In this cluster-randomised trial, we aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to community mental health services in England. METHODS: This multicentre, parallel two-arm, cluster-randomised, controlled superiority trial was conducted in mental health services in five National Health Service trusts in London and the South of England. Clusters were defined at the level of primary care practices within service catchment areas. Participants were adults aged 18 years or older presenting in crisis to mental health services and registered with a practice within trial clusters. Randomisation was done at the cluster level (1:1), stratified by catchment area, and balanced on average general practice (GP) list size and Index of Multiple Deprivation (2015). The chief investigator, senior statistician, and assessors of the primary outcome were masked in the study. Participants either received Open Dialogue or treatment as usual, which refers to the functional team model currently implemented throughout English mental health services. The primary outcome was time (days) to first relapse following initial recovery from the index crisis censored at the end of the 2-year follow-up period. Participant-reported secondary outcomes were EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, Social Provisions Scale, Lubben Social Network Scale, Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery, and the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, measured at five timepoints over 2 years, and clinical measures were extracted from electronic health records. People with relevant lived experience were involved in the design and execution of the study. Fidelity to the model of care in Open Dialogue and treatment as usual, and adherence to the delivery of Open Dialogue, were measured prior to each site starting participant recruitment, then every 6 months thereafter until the final participant follow-up in that site. The trial was retrospectively registered (ISRCTN52653325) and is complete. FINDINGS: 185 general practices associated with six mental health Trusts across England were identified for screening. 105 practices were excluded, and 80 were included in cluster formation, forming 32 clusters that were randomly assigned (16 to treatment as usual and 16 to the Open Dialogue intervention). One mental health trust (two clusters) withdrew, resulting in five mental health trusts (30 clusters) participating in the trial. Between June 25, 2019, and Dec 9, 2021, 494 participants (266 [54%] female gender, 221 [45%] male gender, 341 [69%] White British) with a mean age of 38·1 years (SD 13·4) provided consent for study inclusion (223 in the treatment as usual group and 271 in the Open Dialogue group). Of these, 174 (78%) in the treatment as usual group and 225 (83%) in the Open Dialogue group recovered and had data enabling relapse determination; there was no significant difference between groups on the primary outcome of time to relapse following initial recovery (marginal hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·67-1·32]). For secondary outcomes, Open Dialogue was associated with significantly lower probabilities of psychiatric inpatient admission and re-referral to crisis care or secondary mental health services, and with improvements in self-rated recovery, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with services. There were no significant differences in social network quality or size. There were 386 serious adverse events (281 in the treatment as usual group and 105 in the Open Dialogue group); 376 (97%) were deemed to be unrelated to the intervention. INTERPRETATION: Open Dialogue did not reduce time to first relapse compared with treatment as usual, the primary outcome, but it reduced acute inpatient bed use, improved service user reported outcomes and experience, and there were no significant safety concerns. Further investigation is required to determine whether Open Dialogue can enhance the effectiveness and acceptability of crisis care and continuing care in community mental health services. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Venetoclax added to dose-adjusted EPOCH-R for newly diagnosed double-hit lymphomas: phase 2 results from ALLIANCE A051701, an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: High-grade B-cell lymphoma with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6, known as double-hit lymphoma, is a highly aggressive malignancy with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy. We aimed to study whether the addition of the BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax to chemoimmunotherapy in patients with double-hit lymphoma resulted in superior efficacy compared with chemotherapy alone. METHODS: ALLIANCE A051701 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial in separate cohorts of patients with double-hit lymphoma and patients with double-expressor lymphoma. In this analysis, we report phase 2 results from the double-hit lymphoma cohort. Patients aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed double-hit lymphoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2 were recruited from 41 hospitals and outpatient clinics in the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive DA-EPOCH-R (dose-adjusted etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab) either alone (DA-EPOCH-R group) or with venetoclax (DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group) using permuted block randomisation schedule. All patients and investigators were aware of group assignment. DA-EPOCH-R was administered on a 21-day schedule for up to six total cycles. Venetoclax was given as 600 mg by mouth daily on days 4-8 of cycle 1 and on days 1-5 of cycles 2-6. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the modified intent-to-treat population inclusive of all eligible patients with centrally confirmed double-hit lymphoma. The safety analysis population consisted of all evaluable patients who received at least one dose of protocol treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03984448) and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: 36 patients were randomly assigned to the DA-EPOCH-R group and 37 to the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group between Oct 22, 2019, and Sept 18, 2020. Median age was 65 years (IQR 56-73) and baseline demographic factors were well balanced between groups, with 30 (45%) female and 36 (55%) male patients. Most patients (59 [89%]) were white, two (3%) were Asian, one (2%) was Black or African American, and four (6%) had unknown or unreported ethnicity. The majority of patients had MYC-BCL2 double-hit lymphoma (59 [89%] patients), advanced stage disease (57 [86%] patients), and high-intermediate/high-risk IPI score (42 [64%] patients). Median follow-up was 34·7 months (IQR 30·1-36·8). Median progression-free survival was 28·4 months (95% CI 5·2-not estimable) in the DA-EPOCH-R group (n=30) and 7·7 months (95% CI 4·7-NE) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (n=36; hazard ratio [HR] 1·13, 95% CI 0·53-2·37; p=0·75). Deaths on treatment occurred in one (3%) patient in the DA-EPOCH-R group (due to dyspnoea; possibly related to treatment) and six (17%) patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (four due to sepsis [three at least possible related and one unrelated], two due to cardiac arrest [at least possibly related]), prompting early closure of the double-hit lymphoma cohort. The most common grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse event was febrile neutropenia, occurring in 15 (43%) of 35 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group and 11 (37%) of 30 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R group. The median overall survival has not been reached in either group. The 24-month overall survival estimates were 72% (95% CI 52-85) in the DA-EPOCH-R group compared with 52% (95% CI 33-68) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (HR 2·49, 95% CI 1·03-6·04; p=0·038). INTERPRETATION: The addition of venetoclax to DA-EPOCH-R resulted in excess mortality, prompting early study closure. Robust accrual shows that prospective multicentre trials are feasible in double-hit lymphoma, and the outcomes in the DA-EPOCH-R group serve as a benchmark for future studies. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Chemoradiotherapy versus short-course radiotherapy for response-adapted organ preservation in early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer (STAR-TREC): 12-month results of an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard treatment for most early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer but can cause substantial perioperative morbidity, functional impairment, and reduced quality of life. We assessed whether long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) could increase organ preservation and reduce surgery, toxicity, and quality-of-life harms without compromising oncological outcomes. METHODS: STAR-TREC is an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial in five European countries. Eligible patients were aged 16 years or older in the UK or aged 18 years or older elsewhere, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and rectal adenocarcinoma (≤40 mm staged as mrT1-T3bN0). In phase 2, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to LCCRT-based organ preservation (LCCRT-OP; 50 Gy in 25 fractions plus oral capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily), SCRT-based organ preservation (SCRT-OP; 25 Gy in five fractions), or primary TME. Phase 2 assessed feasibility, with recruitment at months 12 and 24 as the primary endpoint and feasibility thresholds of four or more and six or more randomisations per month, respectively. Phase 3 adopted a partially randomised patient-preference design, allowing participants to choose either organ preservation or TME. Participants that chose organ preservation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive LCCRT-OP or SCRT-OP using centralised, computer-generated assignment, with stratification by country and MRI T category (≤T3a vs T3b) using minimisation. The phase 3 primary endpoint was organ-preservation 30 months after treatment initiation, defined as absence of TME, stoma, or local recurrence, which was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included participants in phase 2 and phase 3. After a planned interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data, the trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee recommended reporting a 12-month, modified intention-to-treat analysis of implementation outcomes for participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023. This study is registered with ISRCTN (14240288) and is closed. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2017, and April 8, 2024, 503 participants were enrolled at 37 sites. Phase 2 enrolled 120 participants, with recruitment rates of three and six participants per month at months 12 and 24, respectively. Overall, 12-month TME-free survival was 60% (47 of 78 participants). After phase 3 recruitment ended, interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data showed an early TME-free survival benefit with LCCRT versus SCRT (12-month median TME-free survival not reached [95% CI not reached-not reached] vs 7·6 months [95% CI 6·4-not reached]; hazard ratio [HR] 3·7 [95% CI 1·7-8·0]; posterior probability of superiority >99·5%). The trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee therefore recommended expanded analysis of 426 participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023: 120 from phase 2 and 306 from phase 3. 17 participants withdrew before treatment, leaving 409 in the modified intention-to-treat population: 163 allocated to LCCRT, 168 to SCRT, and 78 to primary TME. 116 (28%) participants were female and 293 (72%) were male. Among participants who opted for organ preservation, 12-month TME-free survival was 78·5% (95% CI 72·4-85·1) with LCCRT and 60·6% (53·6-68·4) with SCRT (HR 1·90 [95% CI 1·29-2·81]). The most common grade 3-4 serious adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (four [2%] with LCCRT vs six [4%] with SCRT vs six [8%] with TME) and procedural complications (three [2%] with LCCRT vs five [3%] with SCRT vs five [6%] with TME). One participant allocated to primary TME died after an anastomotic leak. INTERPRETATION: These early results support a response-adapted organ-preservation approach, with LCCRT appearing more effective than SCRT at 12 months. Organ-preservation might also reduce treatment-related toxicity compared with primary TME. Longer follow-up is needed for the prespecified 30-month endpoint and definitive functional and oncological outcomes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Stand Up to Cancer, Dutch Cancer Society, Danish Cancer Society, Kom Op Tegen Kanker, Cancerfonden, ALF Region Stockholm, RCC Region Stockholm.

Humans↗