SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Palatal donor site”

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.

211 records · Page 12Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Predictors of Treatment Failure in Children With HIV Starting First-line Antiretroviral Therapy in the ODYSSEY Trial.

BACKGROUND: Data on predictors of treatment failure in children starting antiretroviral therapy (ART) are limited, particularly on dolutegravir-based regimens (DTG). METHODS: ODYSSEY demonstrated superior efficacy of DTG versus standard-of-care (SOC). We assessed predictors at ART initiation of treatment failure by 96 weeks. RESULTS: Three hundred and eighty-one children started first-line ART (82% African). At ART-initiation, median age was 10.5 years (IQR: 6.5, 14.0, 67 < 3 years), CD4% 20% (IQR: 12, 28), BMI-for-age Z-score -.58 (IQR:-1.48, +.25). One hundred and eighty-nine children started DTG, 192 started SOC (91% ≥3 years started efavirenz; 79% <3 years started lopinavir). Seventy-five children experienced treatment failure (24 DTG, 51 SOC). Failure risk was lower on DTG than SOC (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.47, 95% CI: 0.29-0.77, P = .002). Lower BMI-for-age Z-score (HR = 0.82 for each unit gain, 95% CI: 0.70-0.96, P = .01) and being at an African site (HR = 2.09, 95% CI: 0.82-5.31, P = .09) were associated with higher failure risk. Risk was also higher at younger ages with the steepest increase in the youngest children and increased at lower CD4%, with a stronger CD4% effect at younger ages. At CD4% = 20, HRs relative to age 10 years were 2.40 (95% CI: 1.58-3.65) at age 1 year, 1.30 (95% CI: 1.15-1.48) at age 5 years, and 0.80 (95% CI: 0.72-0.89) at age 18 years. At age 1 year, HRs relative to CD4% = 20 were 1.39 (95% CI: 1.16-1.66) at CD4% = 15, and 0.52 (95% CI: 0.36-0.75) at CD4% = 30; at age 10, corresponding estimates were 1.07 (95% CI: 0.94-1.20) at CD4% = 15, and 0.88 (95% CI: 0.69-1.13) at CD4% = 30. CONCLUSIONS: Young age, low BMI-for-age, and low CD4% at ART initiation predicted higher risk of treatment failure and can guide targeted support.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Design, rationale, and baseline patient characteristics for the Sickle Cell Disease and CardiovAscular Risk-Red cell Exchange (SCD-CARRE) trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite wide utilization of automated red blood cell exchange (RBCX) transfusion in adult patients with sickle cell disease (SCD), no consensus or quality efficacy data exist on its use. The Sickle Cell Disease and CardiovAscular Risk- Red cell Exchange (SCD-CARRE) trial tests the hypothesis that an automated chronic RBCX transfusion strategy reduces acute health care encounters and death while improving quality of life and end-organ function (cardiac, pulmonary and renal) in participants with SCD that are at high risk of death. METHODS: Adult patients with SCD with elevated tricuspid regurgitant jet velocity (TRV) and/or chronic kidney disease were considered to be at high risk of death and were randomly assigned to RBCX plus standard of care vs standard of care alone. Participants assigned to RBCX received 12 months of exchange transfusions to maintain target pretransfusion hemoglobin S% < 30%, post-transfusion hemoglobin S% < 20%, and post-transfusion hemoglobin concentration ≥10 g/dL. All study participants were managed according to NHLBI/ASH/ATS Expert Panel guidelines. The primary endpoint was the number of SCD acute health care encounters or death over 13 months. Secondary endpoints included measures of cardiovascular and renal function, exercise capacity, patient reported outcomes (all collected at baseline, and months 4, 8, and 12), and transfusion-related adverse events (collected monthly). RESULTS: Between 2020 and 2025, the SCD-CARRE trial randomized 173 participants at 23 sites across 3 countries. Enrolled participants had mean (SD) age of 45.8 (11.8) years and 54% were female. At baseline, participants had average TRV of 2.8 (0.5) m/s such that 45.9% had a TRV between 2.5 to 2.9 m/sec and 28.1% had a TRV ≥ 3.0 m/sec. The median (Q1, Q3) eGFR in this cohort was 60 (36, 110) mL/min/1.73 m2. The median (Q1, Q3) 6-minute walk test distance was 375 meters (309, 439), the median daily steps were 3,728 (2,187, 5,821), and participants experienced a median (Q1, Q3) of 2 (1, 5) pain episodes in the year prior to randomization. The trial results are pending. CONCLUSIONS: The SCD-CARRE trial successfully enrolled a cohort of n = 173 adults with SCD. This study highlights a rationale to evaluate the effect of automated chronic RBCX transfusion strategy plus standard of care as compared to standard of care alone in SCD patients at high risk of death with a focus on patient centered outcomes, preservation of cardiovascular function, end-organ complications and death. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, Identifier: NCT04084080, https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT04084080.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Osimertinib With or Without Chemotherapy in Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer With EGFR and Concurrent TP53 Mutations: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Combination therapy has emerged as a promising therapeutic approach for patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, its clinical benefit-risk profile remains a focus of ongoing debate. Identifying patients most likely to derive benefit from such regimens remains an unmet clinical need. OBJECTIVE: To prospectively compare the efficacy and safety of first-line osimertinib plus chemotherapy with osimertinib monotherapy for patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A multicenter, randomized, open-label, phase 3 study conducted at 17 sites in China. Between March 25, 2021, and July 11, 2024, a total of 294 eligible patients with treatment-naive, stage IV or recurrent nonsquamous NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 and EGFR-sensitizing mutations were enrolled. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive osimertinib plus chemotherapy (pemetrexed and carboplatin every 3 weeks for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance therapy of osimertinib plus pemetrexed; n = 146) or osimertinib monotherapy (n = 148). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, response, safety, and quality of life. RESULTS: Among 294 enrolled patients, the median age was 57 years (range, 26-79 years), and 159 (54.1%) were female. The data cutoff date was November 11, 2025. At a median follow-up of 25.1 months for the osimertinib-chemotherapy group and 26.1 months for the osimertinib monotherapy group, median progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib plus chemotherapy than with osimertinib monotherapy (34.0 vs 15.6 months; difference, 18.4 months [95% CI, 9.9-22.3]; hazard ratio, 0.44 [95% CI, 0.32-0.60]; P < .001). This benefit was consistent across prespecified subgroups, including those with brain metastases and L858R mutations. The overall survival data remained immature (30.6% maturity); however, a trend toward overall survival benefit with combination therapy was observed. The incidence of grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events was higher in the combination group, with no new safety signal identified. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, osimertinib plus chemotherapy significantly increased progression-free survival among patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC harboring concurrent TP53 mutations. These findings provided a clinical rationale for individualized combination strategies in the management of patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04695925.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide 2·4 mg in Chinese adults with overweight or obesity (STEP 12): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Semaglutide 2·4 mg is a GLP-1 receptor agonist that reduces bodyweight, and provides other cardiometabolic benefits, among people with a BMI at least 30 kg/m2 or at least 27 kg/m2 and with weight-related comorbidities. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy, tolerability, and safety of semaglutide 2·4 mg in adults from mainland China and Taiwan with overweight or obesity according to locally defined, BMI thresholds. METHODS: This completed randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, two-armed, parallel-group, phase 3b trial (STEP 12) was conducted at 19 sites across mainland China and Taiwan. Adults with a BMI of 24-<28 kg/m2 and at least one weight-related comorbidity, or a BMI of 28-<30 kg/m2, with or without type 2 diabetes, were randomly assigned (2:1) to once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2·4 mg or placebo, plus lifestyle intervention, for 44 weeks. Randomisation was performed by the study sponsor using the Randomisation Trial Supplies Management System. Coprimary endpoints were percentage change in bodyweight and the proportion of participants achieving at least 5% bodyweight reduction. Safety was analysed descriptively in all participants who received the trial intervention. Missing data at week 44 were imputed with washout multiple imputation. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06041217, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2023, and May 7, 2025, of 254 screened participants, 161 (66·5%) of 242 participants were randomly assigned to semaglutide 2·4 mg and 81 (33·5%) to placebo; 121 (50·0%) participants were female, and 47 (19·4%) participants had type 2 diabetes. Bodyweight reduction was greater with semaglutide versus placebo (-12·1% [SE 0·6] vs -2·2% [0·8]; estimated treatment difference -9·9 percentage points [95% CI -11·8 to -8·0]; p<0·0001), with a greater proportion of participants achieving at least 5% bodyweight reduction (80·5% vs 24·4%; odds ratio [OR] 14·8 [95% CI 7·4 to 29·6]; p<0·0001). Adverse events were reported in 141 (87·6%) of 161 participants in the semaglutide 2·4 mg group and 61 (75·3%) of 81 participants in the placebo group, with gastrointestinal disorders being the most common. INTERPRETATION: Semaglutide 2·4 mg provided a superior reduction in bodyweight versus placebo in Chinese adults with overweight or obesity. The safety profile was consistent with the known profile of semaglutide. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S. TRANSLATION: For the Mandarin translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Teaching Acute Coronary Syndrome High-Risk ECG Interpretation and Clinical Decision-Making Through FOAMed Videos and Podcast Versus Print-Based Materials Among Emergency Care Providers: Randomized Controlled Mixed Methods Trial.

BACKGROUND: Accurate interpretation of high-risk acute coronary syndrome (ACS) electrocardiograms (ECGs) is essential for early diagnosis and timely reperfusion, yet substantial deficits persist across health care professions. Digital self-learning formats such as FOAMed (Free Open Access Medical Education) are widely used, but their effectiveness has rarely been evaluated for complex, high-risk ACS ECG patterns. Existing ECG education studies often focus on students or single professional groups and established ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) criteria, leaving newer guideline-recognized STEMI equivalents, selected emerging occlusion myocardial infarction (OMI)-related patterns, and interprofessional emergency care underrepresented. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of FOAMed podcast and videos versus traditional print-based materials for teaching high-risk ACS ECG patterns and related clinical decision-making in emergency providers. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, interprofessional, controlled mixed methods trial across 5 training sites in Germany. Paramedics, prehospital emergency physicians, and emergency department clinicians received either a FOAMed multimedia module or print-based materials through concealed allocation; deviations from the intended 1:1 ratio resulted from participant no-shows. The intervention consisted of a 30-minute supervised self-learning session. In total, 103 participants were allocated to FOAMed (n=45) or print-based materials (n=58). Two coprimary outcomes were assessed: ECG interpretation accuracy and text-based ACS clinical decision-making. Secondary outcomes included subjective confidence, learning experience, and exploratory qualitative free-text responses. Outcome assessment was automated and blinded; mixed ANOVA was the primary analysis. The study was not prospectively registered because it assessed educational outcomes in health care professionals rather than patient health outcomes. RESULTS: All 103 participants completed the study. Both groups improved, with greater gains in the FOAMed group: ECG interpretation increased from 55% to 65.5% and text-based ACS clinical decision-making from 45% to 68%, versus 57% to 60% and from 47% to 63%, respectively, in the print-based group. Effect sizes were η²=0.055 for ECG interpretation and η²=0.044 for clinical decision-making. Exploratory subgroup analyses provided no evidence of differential effects across age, gender, or professional background and were likely underpowered. Qualitative responses (46 and 37 entries) provided contextual insights into perceived clarity, engagement, and practical relevance supporting the quantitative findings. CONCLUSIONS: This study is innovative in directly comparing a curated FOAMed multimedia module with selected print-based materials in an interprofessional emergency care population. It differs from existing research by focusing on subtle, emerging ischemic patterns and evaluating realistic, time-limited self-learning formats. The findings provide evidence that curated FOAMed resources can produce greater short-term improvements in ECG interpretation and text-based ACS clinical decision-making than traditional print-based materials in this setting. Although implications for clinical performance remain hypothetical, concise, high-quality digital modules may represent a practical supplement to structured continuing education in emergency care.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Once-weekly IcoSema versus once-daily insulin glargine U100 in type 2 diabetes management (COMBINE 4): an open-label, multicentre, treat-to-target, randomised, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Stepwise treatment intensification is recommended for managing type 2 diabetes, including insulin initiation when non-insulin glucose-lowering medications are insufficient. Guidelines recommend combining a GLP-1 receptor agonist with basal insulin to improve glycaemic efficacy while reducing weight gain and hypoglycaemia risk. COMBINE 4 evaluated the efficacy and safety of IcoSema, a once-weekly combination therapy of basal insulin icodec and semaglutide (a GLP-1-receptor agonist) versus insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) in people with type 2 diabetes on oral glucose-lowering medications. METHODS: COMBINE 4 was a 40-week, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target, phase 3b trial conducted across 97 sites in nine countries. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥8·0%) receiving oral glucose-lowering medications were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio without stratification to IcoSema or once-daily glargine U100. The titration target was 3·9-5·0 mmol/L (70-90 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c and the secondary confirmatory endpoint was change in bodyweight, both from baseline to week 40, evaluated in all randomly allocated participants. Adverse events were recorded during weeks 0-45. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06269107) and is complete. FINDINGS: Of 653 individuals screened between Feb 15 and Aug 6, 2024, 151 did not meet screening criteria and 17 withdrew before initiating treatment; 243 were randomised to IcoSema and 242 to glargine U100. Of the 485 randomly allocated participants, 286 (59%) were male and 199 (41%) were female, and median age was 58 years (range 26-82). For HbA1c, from baseline (9·57% for IcoSema and 9·50% for glargine U100), mean change to week 40 was greater with IcoSema versus glargine U100 (-3·32 vs -2·44 percentage points; estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·88 percentage points [95% CI -1·12 to -0·63]), confirming superiority of IcoSema (p<0·001). From baseline to week 40, mean bodyweight decreased with IcoSema and increased with glargine U100 (-0·79 vs 3·81 kg; ETD -4·61 kg [95% CI -5·46 to -3·75]), confirming superiority of IcoSema (p<0·001). Rate of combined clinically significant (blood glucose <3·0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL], confirmed with a blood glucose meter) or severe hypoglycaemia (severe cognitive impairment requiring external assistance for recovery) was statistically significantly lower with IcoSema versus glargine U100 (0·29 vs 0·59 episodes per person-year of exposure; estimated rate ratio 0·56 [95% CI 0·32 to 0·97]; p=0·04). Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported adverse events with IcoSema. INTERPRETATION: Once-weekly IcoSema demonstrated superior HbA1c reduction and bodyweight change, with lower rates of clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia, versus glargine U100, suggesting that IcoSema might be an effective once-weekly treatment option for insulin-naive individuals with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral glucose-lowering medications. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Long-term safety of oral orforglipron in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (ACHIEVE-J): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Orforglipron, an oral GLP-1 receptor agonist, requires further evaluation in east Asian populations with type 2 diabetes, given this group's distinct pathophysiological characteristics. This study aimed to assess orforglipron as add-on treatment to diet and exercise alone or to oral antihyperglycaemic medications in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study was conducted in 40 medical research centres and hospitals in Japan. Adults with type 2 diabetes and elevated glucose levels managing their condition with diet and exercise alone or with one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications were assigned (1:1:1) via computer-generated random sequence to receive once-daily oral orforglipron (3 mg, 12 mg, or 36 mg). Randomisation was stratified by background therapy, baseline HbA1c (≤8·5% or >8·5%), and metformin use (yes vs no; applied only to α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinedione, and glinides). Investigators, participants, and site staff were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was safety for 52 weeks, assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of orforglipron. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06010004 (ACHIEVE-J). FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2023, and June 5, 2025, 450 participants were screened and 401 were randomly assigned to three groups (3 mg, n=132; 12 mg, n=135; and 36 mg, n=134). 352 (88%) completed study treatment. 339 participants (85%, 95% CI 80·7-87·8) had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), more frequently in the 36-mg group (118 [88%, 95% CI 81·5-92·5]) than in the 3-mg (107 [81%, 73·5-86·8]) and 12-mg (114 [84%, 77·4-89·6]) groups. Most TEAEs were of mild (267 [67%, 61·8-71·0]) or moderate (63 [16%, 12·5-19·6]) severity. Discontinuations due to an adverse event occurred in 19 of 134 participants (14%, 95% CI 9·3-21·1) in the 36-mg group compared with seven of 132 (5%, 2·6-10·5) in the 3-mg group and 11 of 135 (8%, 4·6-14·0) in the 12-mg group. Across treatment groups, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common TEAEs leading to study treatment discontinuation (3 mg: 5 [3·8%, 1·6-8·6]; 12 mg: 8 [5·9%, 3·0-11·3]; and 36 mg: 11 [8·2%, 4·7-14·1]). Level 2 (blood glucose <54 mg/dL) hypoglycaemia events occurred in three of 135 participants in the 12-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·3) and in three of 134 in the 36-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·4) groups. No level 3 (severe) hypoglycaemia events occurred. Outcomes were generally similar across background therapies. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with orforglipron in combination with diet and exercise alone or one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications for 52 weeks demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly. TRANSLATION: For the Japanese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Aged↗

PubMed2026

Matching-adjusted indirect comparison of fruquintinib versus ramucirumab in advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

Aim: Fruquintinib (Fruq), a selective VEGFR 1/2/3 inhibitor, showed a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in the Phase III FRUTIGA trial for advanced gastric/gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) adenocarcinoma. Ramucirumab (RAM), an anti-VEGFR2 antibody, demonstrated efficacy in the RAINBOW-Asia trial. This anchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) evaluated Fruq plus paclitaxel versus RAM plus paclitaxel as second-line therapy for G/GEJ adenocarcinoma in the absence of head-to-head trials. Materials & methods: Data from individual patients in the FRUTIGA study (N = 703) and aggregated data from the RAINBOW-Asia study (N = 440) were analyzed. Baseline characteristics were balanced using entropy balancing. The placebo plus paclitaxel (PBO + PTX) groups served as the common comparators. The primary outcome was PFS; secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were also compared as an exploratory outcome using an adjusted indirect risk difference. Sensitivity analyses included restricted mean survival time and simulated treatment comparison. Results: After weighting (effective sample size = 564), baseline covariates were balanced. The anchored MAIC demonstrated that Fruq + PTX significantly improved PFS compared with RAM + PTX (HR: 0.70; 95% CI: 0.51-0.96; p = 0.0280), corresponding to a 30% reduction in progression risk, with a significant restricted mean survival time benefit of 1.18 months at 20 months (95% CI: 0.08-2.27; p = 0.024). Fruq achieved significantly higher ORR (OR: 1.76, 95% CI: 1.16-2.68; p = 0.008) and DCR (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.33-2.83; p < 0.001). Overall survival was similar (0.97; 95% CI: 0.73-1.30; p = 0.8640). Subgroup analyses showed PFS benefits with Fruq in patients with ECOG PS 1, peritoneal metastases and two or fewer metastatic sites. In sensitivity analysis, the simulated treatment comparison also suggested a PFS benefit for Fruq + PTX (HR: 0.40, 95% CI: 0.32-0.50; p < 0.0001). For any-grade TEAEs, the indirect comparison showed higher adjusted relative incidences of increased bilirubin with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 12.3%; 95% CI: 2.3-22.4%, p < 0.05) and of hypokalemia (RD: 9.0%; 95% CI: 1.5-16.4%, p < 0.05). For grade ≥3 TEAEs, the adjusted relative incidence of decreased body weight was higher with Fruq + PTX than with RAM + PTX (RD: 2.9%; 95% CI: 0.6-5.2%, p < 0.05). The adjusted relative incidences of increased AST, ALT and hypocalcemia were numerically lower in the fruquintinib group than in the RAM group. Conclusion: This MAIC indicates that Fruq + PTX may be more effective than RAM + PTX in second-line advanced G/GEJ adenocarcinoma, with potentially improved PFS, ORR and DCR, and similar overall survival. Safety analyses suggested generally comparable safety profiles across the two regimens. Fruq + PTX remains a valuable treatment option, offering important comparative evidence for clinical and health technology assessment decisions. Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: NCT07144995.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

The glucagon and GLP-1 receptor dual agonist DD01 for metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and steatohepatitis (DD01-DN-02): 12-week results from a randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH) is a major public health problem arising in the context of metabolic syndrome and obesity. DD01 is a liver-targeted GLP-1 receptor and glucagon dual agonist being investigated for the treatment of metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) and MASH. The DD01-DN-02 trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of DD01 in adults with MASLD or MASH; this initial analysis reports prespecified 12-week outcomes to assess early hepatic effects. METHODS: DD01-DN-02 is an ongoing, randomised, double-blind, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial conducted at 12 outpatient clinical sites in the USA. Adults aged 18-70 years with obesity or who were overweight (BMI ≥25 kg/m2) were included in the study. Patients with MASLD or MASH underwent liver biopsy and MRI-proton density fat fraction (PDFF) and were eligible if liver fat content was 10% or higher with metabolic risk factors, or if the biopsy confirmed MASH with a non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score of at least 4. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous DD01 40 mg or matched placebo over 48 weeks, dose-escalated over 2 weeks, using a centrally administered interactive response technology system. The randomisation sequence was computer-generated by an independent statistician. Participants, investigators, study staff, outcome assessors, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants having at least a 30% relative reduction in liver fat by MRI-PDFF at week 12, which was analysed in all randomly assigned participants receiving at least one dose of study drug or placebo. Safety analyses included all participants who received at least one dose of study drug. Missing primary endpoint data were handled using multiple imputation under a missing-at-random assumption. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06410924) and is ongoing but closed to new participants. FINDINGS: Between June 13, 2024, and Jan 30, 2025, 67 eligible participants were enrolled, of whom 33 were randomly assigned to DD01 and 34 to placebo. The mean age of participants was 48·4 years (SD 10·6), 42 (63%) were female, 25 (37%) were male, 57 (85%) were White, and 52 (78%) participants had biopsy-confirmed MASH. At week 12, 25 (76%) of 33 participants receiving DD01 had a 30% or higher reduction in liver fat versus four (12%) of 34 participants receiving placebo (adjusted common odds ratio 28·8 [95% CI 7·2-115·2]; adjusted relative risk 6·3 [95% CI 2·5-15·9]; p<0·0001). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 28 (85%) of 33 participants receiving DD01 and 23 (68%) of 34 participants receiving placebo. The most common adverse events were nausea (18 [55%] of 33 participants assigned DD01; six [18%] of 34 participants assigned placebo), diarrhoea (nine [27%] of 33; six [18%] of 34), and vomiting (ten [30%] of 33; four [12%] of 34). Treatment-emergent adverse events led to treatment discontinuation in four (12%) of 33 participants in the DD01 group and one (3%) of 34 participants in the placebo group. Two (6%) treatment-emergent serious adverse events occurred in the DD01 group (abdominal pain and acute cholecystitis) and zero in the placebo group. No deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: In this prespecified 12-week primary analysis, DD01 produced rapid reductions in liver fat compared with placebo, supporting further evaluation in long-term studies. FUNDING: D&D Pharmatech, Neuraly.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Neurological effects of encapsulated dexamethasone sodium phosphate in children aged 6-9 years with ataxia telangiectasia (NEAT): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ataxia telangiectasia is a rare, multisystem disorder with progressive cerebellar neurodegeneration and no approved treatments. The efficacy of corticosteroids, including erythrocyte encapsulated dexamethasone sodium phosphate (eDSP), which have been studied for two decades in this disease, has not yet been proven in randomised trials. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of eDSP in children aged 6-9 years with ataxia telangiectasia. METHODS: NEAT was a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 study, conducted at 20 sites across nine countries (Denmark, Germany, Italy, Norway, Poland, Spain, Switzerland, UK, and USA). Eligible participants were children aged 6 years or older weighing at least 15 kg, with a genetic diagnosis of ataxia telangiectasia and presence of neurological symptoms. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to the eDSP or placebo group via an independent interactive web response system and were stratified by age (6-9 years or ≥10 years), sex, and region (USA vs other countries). All participants, investigators, sponsors, and raters were masked to treatment assignments. eDSP was given intravenously every 21-30 days for six doses. All randomly assigned participants were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) and safety populations; the primary and secondary efficacy analyses were conducted in participants aged 6-9 years in the ITT population. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in Rescored Modified International Cooperative Ataxia Rating Scale (RmICARS) score between baseline and month 6, and a mixed-model-repeated-measures analysis was used. The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06193200, and is completed. FINDINGS: Between June 24, 2024, and Dec 17, 2025, we screened 125 participants for eligibility, of whom 105 (84%) were randomly assigned to the eDSP group (n=51 [49%]) or the placebo group (n=54 [51%]) and received at least one dose of treatment. The mean age was 8·5 years (SD 1·9) in the eDSP group and 8·6 years (2·3) in the placebo group (overall age range 6-17 years). In the eDSP group, 24 (47%) of 51 participants were girls and 27 (53%) were boys and, in the placebo group, 26 (48%) of 54 were girls and 28 (52%) were boys. Of ITT participants aged 6-9 years, 38 (95%) of 40 in the eDSP group and 41 (95%) of 43 in the placebo group completed the study. Compared with the placebo group, no significant differences were identified in change in RmICARS score from baseline to 6 months in participants aged 6-9 years: least squares mean difference -1·30 (95% CI -2·77 to 0·18; p=0·085). Adverse events were reported in 47 (92%) of 51 participants in the eDSP group and in 50 (93%) of 54 participants in the placebo group. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were vomiting, pyrexia, pruritus, nasopharyngitis, cough, headache, and fatigue. There were no reports of treatment-related serious adverse events or deaths. Safety laboratory parameters did not identify adverse effects on growth, metabolism, bone mineral density, or endocrine function in any of the treatment groups. INTERPRETATION: The primary efficacy endpoint was not achieved, because the effect of eDSP on neurological symptoms did not reach statistical significance. The favourable safety profile of eDSP, previously described in a large study of children with ataxia telangiectasia, was confirmed in this trial. The eDSP programme, comprising two randomised studies and treating the largest cohort of patients with ataxia telangiectasia to date, underscores the need for rigorously designed trials of sufficient duration to detect sustained clinical benefit. FUNDING: Quince Therapeutics.

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↗

PubMed2026

Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Recruiting participants to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is challenging. Identifying effective recruitment strategies would benefit health research: poor recruitment leads to underpowered trials, reducing the reliability of findings and increasing the risk of wasted resources, ethical concerns, and trial failure. Evidence to inform recruitment strategies is increasingly generated through Studies Within A Trial (SWATs), which are methodological studies embedded within host RCTs. This is an update of a review last published in 2018. OBJECTIVES: Primary: to quantify the effects of strategies to improve recruitment of participants to RCTs. Secondary: to evaluate recruitment strategies' cost-effectiveness and impact on retention, and the equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) characteristics of recruited participants. SEARCH METHODS: We used MEDLINE, Embase, and six other databases to identify the studies included in the review. We also sought unpublished recruitment SWATs through social media and targeted email dissemination to trial methodology networks. The latest search date was 16 February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised SWATs evaluating trial recruitment strategies embedded in healthcare and non-healthcare trials. We excluded quasi-randomised, hypothetical, questionnaire-only, retention-only, or clinician incentive studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome: proportion of eligible participants or centres recruited. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: cost-effectiveness, retention rates, and EDI characteristics of included participants. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis for strategies evaluated in at least two studies; otherwise, we synthesised results narratively. We reported effects as risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and assessed between-trial heterogeneity. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for the primary outcome. We expressed cost-effectiveness as the incremental cost per additional participant recruited in pounds sterling (GBP). MAIN RESULTS: We identified 91 eligible studies (53 new to this update), providing 94 comparisons and involving at least 176,747 participants. Eighty-one studies involved strategies aimed at trial participants, while 10 evaluated strategies aimed at recruiters. All were healthcare studies. We found 65 recruitment strategies; 49 were evaluated in a single study. Only five strategies were supported by high-certainty evidence according to GRADE criteria, and we focus on these strategies in the summary below. Open-label trials versus blinded, placebo trials. Open-label trials recruited more participants than blinded trials (RD 10%, 95% CI 8% to 12%; 3 studies, 9004 participants), corresponding to approximately 10 additional participants per 100 approached. The studies involved mostly women in the UK and Estonia. No cost or retention data were reported. Telephone reminder versus no telephone reminder. Telephone reminders to people who did not respond to an initial postal invitation boosted recruitment by 6% (95% CI 3% to 9%; 2 studies, 1450 participants), in trials with low underlying recruitment (we are less certain for trials with over 10% recruitment). The studies involved people with a mean age of 58 years in Canada and Norway. No cost or retention data were reported. Recruitment primer letter versus no letter. Pre-recruitment letters and leaflets designed to encourage participation made little or no difference to recruitment (absolute improvement 1%, 95% CI -1% to 2%; 2 studies, 5376 participants), and were associated with increased costs compared to not sending a primer (incremental cost: GBP 2.08). The studies involved mostly older white people in the UK and Ireland. Multimedia information via a digital link/QR code plus paper participant information leaflet (PIL) versus paper PIL alone. This made little or no difference to recruitment (absolute improvement 0%, 95% CI -1% to 1%; 7 studies, 11,612 participants) and retention (absolute improvement 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%; 5 studies, 7403 participants), and increased costs compared to not including multimedia information (incremental cost: GBP 0.78). The studies involved people in the UK. Optimised, user-tested PIL versus standard PIL. Optimising participant information leaflets (e.g. through user-testing the leaflet with the target population to shape its content, format, and appearance) made little or no difference to recruitment: absolute improvement was 0% (95% CI 0% to 1%; 6 studies, 27,805 participants). The studies involved people in the UK. Only one study reported EDI data; participants were mostly older women. No cost or retention data were reported. We had moderate-certainty evidence for 13 other strategies; confidence was often reduced because the results came from single studies. Seven strategies involved changes to how potential participants received information; four involved changes to trial conduct; one targeted the recruiter or recruitment site; and one tested non-monetary incentives. We had much less confidence in the other 47 comparisons because the studies had design flaws, were single studies, or had very uncertain results. Costs were reported in only 17 of 91 studies. Strategy impact on retention was reported in 15 studies. All but one study (99%) were from high-income countries. The most reported demographics were age (49 studies), sex (32 studies), gender (27 studies), and education level (16 studies). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on strategies to improve trial recruitment remains broad but lacks depth. Of 65 strategies evaluated, only five were supported by high-certainty evidence. Open-label trial designs and telephone reminders to non-responders increased recruitment, while optimised participant information leaflets, recruitment primer letters, and multimedia information provided alongside a paper participant information leaflet had little or no effect. Reporting of participant characteristics was poor, limiting assessment of equity, diversity, and inclusion across most studies. Evidence is heavily skewed toward high-income countries. Future research must prioritise evaluations in low-to-middle-income settings and consistently report cost, retention, and EDI outcomes. We strongly urge the methodology research community to strengthen the evidence base by prioritising replications of existing strategies over the development and testing of new ones. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (Advanced Fellowship, Adwoa Parker, reference:NIHR302256). Health Research Board, Republic of Ireland, Evidence Synthesis Ireland (grant ESI-2021-001) REGISTRATION: This review updates an earlier Cochrane review, which was first published in 2002 and subsequently updated in 2007, 2010, and 2018. Previous versions of the review and their protocols are available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub2 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub3 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub4 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub5 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub6.

Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic↗

PubMed2026

Durvalumab and tremelimumab, with or without lenvatinib, combined with transarterial chemoembolisation in participants with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (EMERALD-3): a global, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE), a standard treatment for embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), induces tumour immune responses. Single tremelimumab regular interval durvalumab (STRIDE) is a standard treatment in advanced HCC. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of STRIDE, with or without lenvatinib, plus TACE, in participants with embolisation-eligible HCC. METHODS: EMERALD-3 is a phase 3, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded study, conducted at 177 medical sites in 21 countries. Eligible participants were 18 years or older (aged ≥21 years in Egypt or Singapore) at screening and had confirmed HCC (by imaging or histopathologically from biopsy specimen, surgery, or both) not amenable to curative surgery, curative ablation, or transplantation but amenable to TACE. Participants had Child-Pugh class A liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and at least one measurable target intrahepatic lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, STRIDE plus TACE, or TACE until each group reached its preplanned enrolment target of 175 participants. After the STRIDE plus TACE group reached its enrolment target, randomisation was adjusted to continue in a 1:1 ratio between the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group and TACE group until approximately 275 participants were enrolled in each of these two groups. Randomisation used a centrally assigned interactive response technology system, stratified by region, baseline tumour burden, and previous palliative embolisation. In the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group, on the first day, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab intravenously, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab plus oral lenvatinib (8 mg for <60 kg bodyweight or 12 mg for ≥60 kg bodyweight); participants then received 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks plus once-daily lenvatinib for up to 36 cycles. In the STRIDE plus TACE group, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab and 1500 mg durvalumab intravenously on the first day, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks. The technique and number of TACE procedures were at the investigators' discretion, with the first procedure administered at least 7 days after the first dose of durvalumab in the two investigation treatment groups and within 7 days of random allocation in the TACE group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE and progression-free survival and overall survival for STRIDE plus TACE versus TACE. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05301842), with enrolment completed. FINDINGS: From March 28, 2022, to Nov 20, 2024, 1124 participants were screened. The full analysis set comprised 760 participants, who were randomly allocated to STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (n=293), STRIDE plus TACE (n=175), or TACE (n=292). 633 (83%) participants were male and 127 (17%) were female; 548 (72%) were Asian. At the first data cutoff (Sept 2, 2025); the overall median follow-up for progression-free survival was 10·0 months (IQR 4·6-17·2); median follow-up for progression-free survival was 11·0 months (IQR 4·8-18·4) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 8·3 months (4·1-15·5) for TACE. Median progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 12·2-16·7) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus 9·8 months (8·0-11·4) for TACE (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·86]; p=0·0007). At the second data cutoff (Feb 23, 2026) and a median follow-up for overall survival of 24·6 months (IQR 16·5-31·5) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 22·9 months (14·9-30·2) for TACE, median overall survival was 39·5 months (95% CI 34·1-not reached) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 34·7 months (28·8-not reached) for TACE (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·65-1·09]; p=0·18). At this data cutoff, median progression-free survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 10·2-15·9) for STRIDE plus TACE and 8·1 months (6·5-10·2) for the first 175 participants randomised to TACE (HR 0·71 [95% CI 0·56-0·91]), with median follow-up of 10·3 months (IQR 4·6-23·7) for STRIDE plus TACE and 7·7 months (3·0-18·5) for the first 175 participants randomly allocated to TACE. The most common adverse events of maximum grade 3 or 4 were hypertension (34 [12%] of 287) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, post-embolisation syndrome and anaemia (ten [6%] of 175 each) for STRIDE plus TACE, and post-embolisation (17 [6%] of 290) for TACE. 184 (64%) participants receiving STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, 89 (51%) receiving STRIDE plus TACE, and 68 (23%) receiving TACE had serious adverse events. Treatment-related adverse events with an outcome of death during the treatment-emergent period occurred in seven (2%) of 287 participants who received STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (two for myocarditis; and one each for hepatic failure, haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, septic shock, cardiac failure, and unknown cause), none of 175 participants who received STRIDE plus TACE, and two (1%) of 290 participants who received TACE (one each for acute myocardial infarction and unknown cause). INTERPRETATION: STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE showed a statistically significant progression-free survival improvement versus TACE. These findings support a STRIDE-based regimen as a potential new treatment option for people with embolisation-eligible HCC; additional follow-up is being conducted for final analysis of overall survival across treatment groups. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Adult↗