SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “RACE-IT trial”

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.

1,784 records · Page 13Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Continuous Intravenous Lidocaine for Refractory Cancer Pain in Palliative Care: A Multicenter Feasibility Study.

ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and tolerability of continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain receiving palliative care, and to explore its potential impact on pain outcomes in real-world clinical conditions.MethodsWe conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled feasibility study in palliative care units to evaluate continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion in patients with opioid-refractory cancer pain. Patients were randomized to receive lidocaine (5 mg/kg/day, increased to 8 mg/kg/day if pain reduction was <30% after 24 h) or placebo for 48 h. Pain intensity was assessed using the Numeric Pain Intensity Scale, with a clinically meaningful response defined as a ≥30% reduction from baseline at 40 min. Secondary outcomes included pain evolution over time, neuropathic pain, symptom burden, and tolerability.ResultsThirty-five patients were included in the final analysis (18 lidocaine, 17 placebo). No significant difference was observed between lidocaine and placebo for the primary endpoint or for secondary pain outcomes. Reductions in pain intensity were observed in both groups. In the lidocaine group, 61% of patients required dose escalation to 8 mg/kg/day. Continuous intravenous lidocaine infusion was generally well tolerated, with mostly mild adverse events and no unexpected toxicity.ConclusionIn this multicenter feasibility study, continuous low-dose intravenous lidocaine did not demonstrate a clinically meaningful analgesic benefit over placebo. As the planned sample size was not reached, the study was underpowered. These findings highlight the challenges of randomized trials in palliative care and may inform future feasibility-oriented designs.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Assessing the Concurrent Validity of the Australian Treatment Outcomes Profile in a Methamphetamine Dependent Treatment-Seeking Population.

INTRODUCTION: The Australian Treatment Outcomes Profile (ATOP) is a brief clinical tool assessing substance use, health and well-being used in Australian alcohol and other drug treatment services. It is validated for use with clients using alcohol, opioids and cannabis, but not yet for clients who primarily use methamphetamine. METHODS: An embedded validation study was undertaken in treatment-seeking adults enrolled in a randomised double-blind placebo-controlled trial of lisdexamfetamine for methamphetamine dependence with sites in New South Wales, South Australia and Victoria. Participant demographics were collected during study screening. The ATOP and comparators (Time Line Follow Back, Opiate Treatment Index, Depression Anxiety Stress Scale, WHOQOL-BREF and Personal Wellbeing Index) were collected at baseline. Continuous ATOP items were analysed using Pearson's correlation coefficient, and dichotomous items were analysed using Fleiss's κ. Agreement was rated as strong where measures were ≥ 0.50, moderate where agreement was 0.30-0.49, and weak where < 0.30. RESULTS: One hundred and eighteen study participants (2018-2020) had data for concurrent validity analysis. Strong validity was demonstrated for physical health, psychological health, quality of life, injecting drug use and crime items, and for days of use for amphetamines, alcohol, cannabis and cocaine. There was weak validity for days of use for benzodiazepines. Heroin use days and other opioid use days were endorsed by fewer than five participants and were therefore unable to be assessed. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS: The ATOP is valid for use in a treatment-seeking methamphetamine-dependent population, expanding the range of tools for assessment and standardised outcome monitoring across different settings and services.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

AI Health message intervention: The role of message customization and message source in breast cancer screening among women of color.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the effectiveness of breast cancer screening messages with varying levels of customization (generic, targeted, and tailored) and to compare AI-generated versus human-generated messages. METHODS: A between-subjects experimental design with a control condition was employed. Message content followed a standardized structure and varied by level of customization: generic, targeted (demographic-based), and tailored (perceived susceptibility- and barrier-based). Messages were developed by either the authors or GenAI (ChatGPT-4o). A total of 391 participants recruited via Prolific were randomly assigned to five groups (generic, targeted-human, targeted-AI, tailored-human, and tailored-AI). Self-efficacy, behavioral intentions, attitudes, and message believability were measured using different scales. RESULTS: Customized (tailoring and targeting) health messages performed comparably to generic messages in shaping positive health outcomes. GenAI-generated messages also produced outcomes comparable to those of human-generated messages under standardized conditions. Significant negative indirect effects through message believability for the human-tailored condition was found relative to the generic condition. CONCLUSIONS: GenAI may be a useful tool for developing and customizing scalable health messages. Its effectiveness depends not only on customization but also on maintaining message quality, including readability, clarity, coherence, naturalness, and credibility. PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS: GenAI may support health practitioners in developing customized and scalable breast cancer messages. However, professional review remains necessary to ensure that the message is culturally appropriate, responsive to patient concerns, and suitable for use alongside patient-provider communication.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Integration of Clinical Case Scenarios With Anatomical Dissection Teaching-Is Recall Improved Among Medical Students?

BACKGROUND: There is ongoing debate about how best to deliver anatomy teaching in a modern medical curriculum. Some studies suggest that the separation of basic sciences and clinical teaching can impact students' confidence in anatomy, which has potential long-term implications on their medical career. This suggests new pedagogic approaches to improve anatomy teaching may be beneficial. This study aimed to establish if integrating a clinical case into anatomy practical classes would improve students' anatomy recall compared to anatomy teaching alone. APPROACH: A ten minute clinical scenario was developed, which focused on the typical history, examination, investigations and management of a hip fracture patient. Medical students (n = 220) currently studying lower limb anatomy were randomised by pre-assigned anatomy groups to become intervention or control. In the intervention group, students received the clinical case teaching, followed by their anatomy session. In the control group, students attended the anatomy session. Students in both groups were then assessed on hip anatomy. The intervention group also gave their perception of the clinical case. EVALUATION: This study showed that participants who received integrated teaching performed significantly better in the anatomy recall test (3.64 SD ± 0.574) than whose who had anatomy teaching only (1.95 SD ± 0.994) (chi2 = 185.51, p < 0.00001). Most participants (93.5%; 101/108) strongly agreed/agreed that integrating clinical cases into anatomy teaching benefited their learning. IMPLICATIONS: These results suggest that students' anatomy recall may be improved by integrating clinical cases and anatomy teaching. It also suggests that students found this approach beneficial for their learning.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Complementary feeding patterns in preterm and term infants.

Complementary feeding is essential for infants' nutritional status and development, marking the transition to solid foods when breast milk or formula alone is insufficient. Despite its importance, clear recommendations on which foods to introduce when initiating complementary feeding in preterm infants are lacking. By using data from our previously published randomized controlled trial on the timing of complementary feeding in preterm infants, the current study explores the complementary feeding patterns of preterm infants and compares them with those of term-born infants, providing insights into parental decision-making and potential long-term health impacts. Complementary feeding practices differed significantly between preterm (n = 255) and term (n = 159) infants, with preterm infants more often receiving vegetables as their first solid food (85.4% versus 68.8%, difference 17.6% with 95% CI 12-35%). The group with early introduction of vegetables had a lower BMI-for-age z-scores (β -0.28 [95% CI -0.55 - 0.02]) and weight-for-height z-scores (β -0.27 [95% CI -0.53 to -0.01]) at two years of age. Additionally, preterm infants showed a greater variety in the numbers of different fruits and vegetables consumed by six months (corrected) age than term-born counterparts (8.29 (SD 3.65) versus 6.26 (SD 3.47), p < 0.001). These results indicate that complementary feeding patterns in preterm infants differ from term-born infants, with potential positive implications on growth. These data contribute to the development of accurate feeding protocols for preterm infants. Given that feeding practices are culturally influenced, further multinational research is essential to refine complementary feeding guidelines for preterm infants and support caregivers in informed decision-making.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Complicated urinary tract infections: evolving definitions, clinical burden, and treatment landscape amid antimicrobial resistance.

INTRODUCTION: Complicated urinary tract infection (cUTI) is a common and heterogeneous infection associated with substantial morbidity, high healthcare utilization, and increasing antimicrobial resistance. Evolving definitions, increasing device use, and changing patient populations have altered its epidemiology and management. Marked variability in diagnostic criteria, clinical trial endpoints within and outside registrational settings, and treatment strategies complicates clinical decision-making and interpretation of therapeutic advances. AREAS COVERED: This review examines contemporary cUTI epidemiology, classification frameworks, and drivers of disease burden. It evaluates resistance trends and their therapeutic implications, alongside stewardship-based management strategies, including empiric antibiotic selection, intravenous-to-oral transition, treatment duration, and source control. Challenges in catheter-associated infection, recurrence, and regulatory endpoint design are discussed, together with the emerging role of novel agents targeting resistant Gram-negative pathogens. EXPERT OPINION: Rising multidrug resistance and limited oral options are reshaping cUTI management, necessitating individualized, stewardship-aligned therapy guided by illness severity and local epidemiology. Current regulatory endpoints inadequately reflect patient-centered outcomes, particularly in the context of asymptomatic bacteriuria. Expanding availability of effective oral agents may enable earlier discharge and outpatient care. Integration of rapid diagnostics and risk stratification will be essential to optimize therapy, limit resistance, and improve outcomes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety Profile of the Non-steroidal Anti-inflammatory Drug Celecoxib in the Short-Term Management of Acute Non-cancer Pain: A Systematic Review with Meta-analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: To summarise the literature regarding the safety of short-term use of the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID) celecoxib. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review with meta-analysis of randomised trials. Participants comprised individuals of all ages with acute non-cancer pain. Interventions included celecoxib at 200-400 mg/day for up to 10 days. The comparators were placebo, other NSAIDs (including cyclooxygenase-2 [COX-2] inhibitors and non-selective NSAIDS [nsNSAIDS]), or opioids. DATA SOURCES: Five databases were searched from inception to April 2025: Embase, Web of Science, MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Scopus. Additionally, a registry was searched: ClinicalTrials.gov. DATA SYNTHESIS: Meta-analyses using Mantel-Haenszel and random-effects model were used to calculate risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for severe cardiovascular, respiratory, and gastrointestinal adverse events and secondary outcomes. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomised trials (RoB-2) was used to assess bias risk. The Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was conducted to assess the certainty of evidence of each reported outcome. RESULTS: Title/abstract and full text screening comprised 3976 and 273 studies, respectively. Fifty studies were included with 10,693 participants. The RRs for adverse events were no different between celecoxib and placebo for severe events (3 studies) (RR 0.44 [95% CI 0.10-2.03]), cardiovascular (3 studies) (RR 0.84 [95% CI 0.24-2.92]), respiratory (4 studies) (RR 1.23 [95% CI 0.29-5.26]), and gastrointestinal events (33 studies) (RR 0.96 [95% CI 0.64-1.43]). There was no difference between celecoxib and NSAIDS for gastrointestinal adverse events, RR 0.89 (95% CI 0.68-1.17). Celecoxib had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal events, RR 0.34 (95% CI 0.14-0.86), and showed a lower risk of nausea compared with placebo, RR 0.75 (95% CI 0.60-0.93), and nsNSAIDS, RR 0.80 (95% CI 0.64-0.99). Most studies had some risk of bias concerns, and the overall certainty of evidence for most outcomes was very low. Celecoxib appears to be safe for acute non-cancer pain when compared to placebo, NSAIDS, and opioids. It had a lower risk compared to opioids for gastrointestinal adverse events in general, nausea and vomiting, as well as a lower risk for nausea adverse events when compared to placebo and nsNSAIDS. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO-CRD42025642152.

Journal Article↗

PubMed2026

Occlusion site and outcomes in intra-arterial tenecteplase after successful endovascular therapy: a secondary analysis of the ANGEL-TNK trial.

BACKGROUND: Endovascular thrombectomy achieves macroreperfusion in large vessel occlusion (LVO) stroke, but only one-quarter of patients had excellent functional outcome. Adjunct intra-arterial (IA) tenecteplase could further improve the treatment effect, yet its efficacy across internal carotid artery (ICA) versus middle cerebral artery (MCA) M1/M2 occlusion remains unclear. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether IA tenecteplase improves 90-day functional outcomes in LVO patients stratified by occlusion site (ICA, MCA M1, MCA M2). METHODS: Prespecified secondary analysis of the ANGEL-TNK trial (multicenter, randomized, open-label, blinded endpoint) in 19 Chinese stroke centers. Participants were enrolled who had anterior circulation LVO, 4.5-24 hours from symptom onset, and CT angiography (CTA)/magnetic resonance angiography (MRA)-proven ICA, M1, or M2 occlusion. INTERVENTION: Randomization (1:1) to IA tenecteplase (0.125 mg/kg) or standard medical management after expanded Thrombolysis in Cerebral Infarction (eTICI) 2b50-3 reperfusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The primary outcome was the rate of 90-day modified Rankin Scale (mRS) 0-1. RESULTS: There were 256 patients in the trial, including 71 (27.7%) ICA, 122 (47.6%) MCA M1, and 62 (24.2%) MCA M2. ICA occlusion patients treated with IA tenecteplase had higher rates of 90-day mRS 0-1 (39.4% vs 13.2%; relative risk (RR) 2.99; 95% CI 1.51 to 5.96; p=0.002) and mRS 0-3 (54.5% vs 42.1%; RR 1.30; p=0.048) versus controls, with a significant shift toward better mRS scores (median 3 (IQR 1-4) vs 4 (2-6); odds ratio (OR) 2.26; p<0.001). Post hoc analysis showed higher eTICI progression in ICA patients (51.5%) versus MCA M1 (37.9%) and M2 (25.7%). IA tenecteplase had a lower any intracranial hemorrhage within 48 hours in ICA patients (15.2% vs 39.5%; RR 0.38; p<0.001) compared with standard medical management. No significant benefits were observed in the MCA M1/M2 subgroups, and interaction effects were significant between ICA and MCA segments for functional outcomes and safety. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: IA tenecteplase had a better functional outcome and lower hemorrhage risk in ICA occlusion compared with standard medical management but not in MCA M1/M2. Occlusion site is a critical determinant of response to IA tenecteplase. A pooled analysis of IA tenecteplase stratified by occlusion site strata is warranted.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Evaluating the utility of melatonin in spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

BACKGROUND: Spine surgery is increasingly performed worldwide, and acute postoperative stressors such as pain and anxiety remain highly prevalent despite historical management with opioids and other pharmacological agents. Recently, interest has emerged in melatonin administration given its endogenous physiological roles, low cost, favorable adverse event profile, and documented benefits throughout surgical literature. PURPOSE: This study aims to consolidate the existing evidence on melatonin's utility specifically in spine surgery, an area not yet comprehensively evaluated, to inform clinical practice and enhance spine surgeon comprehension. STUDY DESIGN/SETTING: Preregistered on PROSPERO, this systematic review queried PubMed/MEDLINE, CINAHL, SPORTDiscus, and Web of Science on November 21st, 2025, for studies reporting outcomes following melatonin administration in patients undergoing spine surgery. METHODS: Study quality was assessed using the Cochrane Risk-of-Bias 2 tool. Extracted variables included demographics, comparator medications, dosages, and other relevant details. Statistical analyses included frequency-weighted means (FWMs), associated standard deviations, narrative syntheses, and limited meta-analyses, where appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 6 moderate-quality randomized trials were included from 749 screened. Melatonin (3-10 mg) was administered to 227 patients (FWM age=43.3±8.6 years; 46.2% male; BMI=26.6±3.2 kg/m2), placebo to 125 patients (age=43.2±10.1 years; 60% male; BMI=28.5±4.3 kg/m2), and active pharmacologic comparators (fentanyl, gabapentin, dexmedetomidine, zolpidem) to 151 patients (age=46.6±8.9 years; 40.5% male; BMI=26.3±3.5 kg/m2). Procedures primarily involved uncomplicated lumbar laminectomies (1-4 levels), with outcomes assessed up to 24 hours postoperatively. Melatonin was associated with significant improvements in early postoperative VAS-pain scores, blood-pressure-related, analgesic-related, and anxiety-related outcomes versus placebo across most reporting studies. Compared with active pharmacologic agents, significant benefits were observed only in select nausea- and anxiety-related instances. Limited meta-analysis (n=2) demonstrated higher 24-hour VAS-pain for melatonin versus gabapentin, though mean difference was near-negligible and harbored extensive statistical constraints. CONCLUSION: Melatonin demonstrates variable utility following spine surgery, with generally consistent anxiolysis and frequent benefit versus placebo but less consistent and comparatively weaker efficacy relative to active pharmacologic comparators. Future outcome-homogenous studies incorporating more granular, expansive comparator arms and more robust quantitative analyses are needed to further elucidate melatonin's role in advancing spine care. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Virtual Reality Mastoidectomy as Precadaver Training for Novices: A Randomized Crossover Study.

OBJECTIVES: To compare cognitive load during virtual reality (VR) simulation and cadaveric dissection (CD) mastoidectomy training in novice learners. To determine whether training order influences cognitive load, characterize cognitive load progression during the procedure, and assess whether VR training improves subsequent cadaveric performance. METHODS: In this randomized crossover study, 24 core surgical trainees with no prior mastoidectomy experience performed a cortical mastoidectomy in both VR and CD settings. Participants were randomized to either VR-first or CD-first training sequences. Cognitive load was measured using a bespoke auditory reaction-time device at baseline and 10, 30, and 50 min. Relative reaction time (RRT) served as an objective index of cognitive load. Cadaveric performance was assessed using the Modified Welling Scale by two blinded otologists. RESULTS: Cognitive load was significantly lower during VR than CD, with mean RRT rising 26% from baseline in VR versus 60% in CD (p < 0.001). Training order did not affect cognitive load in either modality, and RRT increased progressively throughout mastoidectomy in both VR and CD. Participants who began with VR achieved significantly higher cadaveric performance scores than those who began with CD (mean 9.50 vs. 4.96; p < 0.001), and inter-rater reliability for performance scoring was high. CONCLUSION: VR mastoidectomy reduces cognitive load and enhances subsequent cadaveric performance in novice trainees, supporting its role as a cognitively optimized precadaver training modality that complements, rather than replaces, cadaveric dissection. These findings suggest VR enhances early learning efficiency and resource utilization in novice otolaryngology training. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: N/A.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of antidepressant administration on physical performance and perceived exertion in athletes: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Antidepressants are commonly prescribed in athletes with depressive disorders, yet their potential effects on physical performance and perceived exertion remain unclear, and existing evidence is limited and inconsistent. AIM: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effects of antidepressant use on objective physical performance and perceived exertion in athletes. METHOD: A systematic literature search was conducted in PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and SPORTDiscus through March 2025. Eligible studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English that enrolled elite, competitive, or recreational athletes; compared antidepressant administration with placebo or no treatment; and reported at least one objective or subjective performance-related outcome. Meta-analyses were performed using random-effects models, and pooled mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated. This systematic review and meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD420251123740). RESULTS: Ten crossover RCTs involving 99 male athletes were included. Interventions included a norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor (reboxetine), a norepinephrine-dopamine reuptake inhibitor (bupropion), and selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (fluoxetine or paroxetine). Acute antidepressant administration was associated with a small increase in rating of perceived exertion (RPE; mean difference 0.52 points on the Borg 6-20 scale, 95% CI 0.01-1.04; p < 0.05). No significant overall effects were observed for time-trial performance, mean power output, heart rate or blood lactate. However, subgroup analyses showed that reboxetine significantly impaired time-trial performance (mean difference 3.62 min, 95% CI 0.18-7.06; p < 0.05) and reduced mean power output (mean difference - 19.97 W, 95% CI - 36.87 to - 3.06; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Short-term antidepressant administration in athletes was associated with a small increase in perceived exertion, without consistent impairment in objective physical performance. As the current evidence derives exclusively from male athletes and acute exposure, further research should clarify its relevance to female athletes and to longer-term antidepressant treatment in athletes with depressive disorders.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Response-optimised training improves learning of a complex motor task and closely related motor tasks.

Regular physical exercise is essential for promoting healthy aging and longevity. In older adults with varying physical and cognitive decline, optimising exercise interventions is crucial to maximise benefits. A promising approach to achieve this goal is by adjusting task demands to individual abilities in turn preventing over- or underloading their abilities. In the field of motor learning, it is currently unclear whether such an optimised training improves not only performance on the trained task but also transfers to untrained motor and cognitive tasks. We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, 6-week dynamic balance training (DBT) with healthy older adults (n = 30). Training was tailored to individual balance ability. Participants were assigned to either suboptimal (high or low difficulty) or optimal (moderate difficulty) training groups. Transfer effects were assessed via cognitive tasks (memory and executive) and motor tasks (untrained DBT variations and other balance tasks) measured pre-, mid- and post-intervention. Multivariate longitudinal statistical analysis showed higher performance gains in the optimal training group in three out of six sessions compared to the suboptimal groups, especially under testing conditions with high task demands. The optimal group also showed greater improvements in near motor transfer tasks mid- and post-intervention, while no significant differences were observed in the cognitive tasks. Within-group DBT learning positively correlated with transfer gains, highlighting the role of training response in achieving transfer. In conclusion, optimised task difficulty in balance training enhances both task-specific performance and related motor skills, supporting the use of personalised interventions to maintain function and independence in older adults.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Perspectives of participating neurologists and study nurses - Mixed-methods process evaluation of a web-based program for relapse management in multiple sclerosis (POWER@M2).

BACKGROUND: Relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory disease of the central nervous system and the leading cause of disability in young adults. In Germany, 90% of relapses are treated with high-dose intravenous glucocorticoids, despite limited evidence for long-term benefit and international preference for oral administration. Time constraints often hinder informed decision-making. The multicentre Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) POWER@MS2 (N = 160, 2020-2023), conducted at 18 German MS-centres, aimed to promote self-determined relapse management through a complex intervention (dialogue-based decision aid, nurse-led webinar, online-chat). OBJECTIVE: While RCTs demonstrate effectiveness, process evaluations are essential to understand implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors. This study explored healthcare professionals' experiences and attitudes toward implementing relapse self-management and self-medication in clinical practice. METHODS: A mixed-methods process evaluation followed the UK Medical Research Council- framework. Quantitative data were collected via validated questionnaires at up to three time points and analysed descriptively. Interview guides were developed based on these results. Qualitative data from neurologist and study nurse interviews were thematically analysed. Results were triangulated using a joint display. RESULTS: Data were collected from 55 neurologists and 17 study nurses (quantitative) and from 7 neurologists and 4 nurses (qualitative) (2020-2024). Most neurologists opposed routine steroid use, reserving it for severe relapses. Some voiced concerns about self-management, but informed patients were generally viewed as capable of safe self-medication. Study nurses gave mixed feedback on the intervention, citing overload and improved guidance. CONCLUSION: Clinicians showed openness toward implementing the intervention. Enhancing accessibility and addressing specific concerns may support broader adoption.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Thymosin-ɑ1 for people with chronic hepatitis B.

RATIONALE: Chronic hepatitis B is a global public health concern. It is caused by infection with the hepatitis B virus (HBV). The goal of treating chronic HBV infection is to prevent progression to chronic hepatitis, cirrhosis, hepatic decompensation, liver failure, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Individual studies have evaluated various immunomodulatory therapies with inconsistent results. Thymosin-ɑ1 is known to have antiviral effects; however, results of randomised clinical trials on the effects of thymosin-α1 as a potential treatment for people with chronic HBV have been inconsistent. OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of thymosin-ɑ1 therapy in people with chronic hepatitis B. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Hepato-Biliary Group Controlled Trials Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, four other databases and six trials registers, in addition to reference checking, citation searching, and contacting study authors to identify trials for inclusion. The latest search date was 10 June 2026. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated thymosin-α1 at any dose, route of administration, or formulation type, in people with chronic hepatitis B regardless of age, sex, or ethnicity. Thymosin-α1 could have been administered as monotherapy, in combination with an additional drug, or in addition to standard medical treatment and compared with placebo, no intervention, the same additional drug, or the same standard medical treatment. OUTCOMES: Our critical outcomes were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, and health-related quality of life. Among our important outcomes were HBV-related morbidity, HBV-related mortality, non-serious adverse events, and the proportion of people without histological improvements. RISK OF BIAS: We used the Cochrane Risk of bias 2 tool (RoB 2) to assess risk of bias. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We followed Cochrane methods. We conducted meta-analyses for predefined outcomes using data from the longest follow-up period, irrespective of the risk of bias judgements. We presented dichotomous outcome results as risk ratios (RRs) and continuous outcome results as mean differences, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) at their longest follow-ups. We used the random-effects model for our primary analyses. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence for each outcome. INCLUDED STUDIES: We included 10 RCTs conducted in Bangladesh, China, Italy, Korea, Singapore, and Taiwan, with 1349 randomised participants (range: 12 to 690; 1045 (77.5%) were male). Among the trials reporting age, none included participants younger than 17 years (age range: 17 to 75 years). The trials were published between 1991 and 2018, and assessed thymosin-ɑ1 in adults with chronic hepatitis B infection, with or without comorbidities. Only two trials mentioned comorbidities (cirrhosis and acute-on-chronic liver failure). The trials compared thymosin-ɑ1, with or without a cointervention, with placebo or no intervention, or with the same cointervention. The control interventions were placebos in two trials and no intervention in two. The remaining six trials administered co-interventions, such as interferon, pegylated interferon, lamivudine, and standard medical therapy (entecavir or tenofovir), and entecavir. Follow-ups ranged from six months to five years after the end of treatment (median: 12 months). Four trials were funded by industry, five by research grants, and one provided no information. All 10 trials (11 records) provided data on at least one outcome in our review. We identified no ongoing trials. Sixteen studies are awaiting assessment due to incomplete reporting. We received no responses to our enquiries. SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Thymosin-ɑ1, compared with the control interventions, may reduce all-cause mortality (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.96; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 907 participants; very low-certainty evidence), serious adverse events (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.99; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 1056 participants; low-certainty evidence), HBV-related mortality (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.96; I² = 0%; 3 studies, 907 participants; very low-certainty evidence), non-serious adverse events (RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.27 to 0.83; I² = 0%; 5 studies, 300 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and may have little to no effect on health-related quality of life (MD 0.70, 95% CI -2.55 to 3.95; I² not applicable; 1 study, 161 participants; very low-certainty evidence; score range: 0 to 100; the higher the score, the better) and on histological improvement (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.06; I² = 74%; 2 studies, 702 participants; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of thymosin-ɑ1 on hepatitis B-related morbidity (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.40; I² = 3%; 3 studies, 854 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We judged the certainty of evidence to be low for serious adverse events and very low for the remaining outcomes. Reasons for downgrading were mainly due to study limitations, including overall high or some concerns for risk of bias; imprecision of the pooled effect estimates (including wide or very wide confidence intervals crossing the line of no effect, and small participant numbers); and inconsistency due to substantial heterogeneity (I² = 74%). The test for subgroup differences provided no evidence of differences in effect according to thymosin‑α1 administration for any outcome (P ≥ 0.05). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We assessed the certainty of evidence as very low for all outcomes except for serious adverse events (low). Therefore, we are not sure whether thymosin-α1 monotherapy versus placebo or no intervention, or with the same co-interventions, reduces all-cause mortality, serious adverse events, HBV-related mortality, and non-serious adverse events, nor whether it has any effect on quality of life (based on one trial) and histological improvement. The effect of thymosin-ɑ1 on HBV-related morbidity is very uncertain. We observed no statistically significant differences between trials with and without cointerventions. We found no ongoing trials. FUNDING: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol available via DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD014610.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety and efficacy of distal versus conventional radial artery cannulation for invasive blood pressure monitoring: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

To compare the safety and effectiveness of distal radial artery (DRA) versus conventional radial artery (CRA) catheterization for invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring. This meta-analysis followed PRISMA guidelines. Randomized controlled trials published up to December 30, 2025 were systematically searched in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, CINAHL, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and SinoMed. Two reviewers independently screened studies, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Meta-analyses were conducted using Review Manager 5.4 and Stata 18.0, and evidence quality was evaluated with the GRADE system. 12 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 1,790 participants were included. For the primary outcomes, compared with CRA, DRA was associated with lower incidences of haematoma (RR = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.24-0.73), catheter blockage (RR = 0.33, 95% CI: 0.14-0.81), and bleeding (RR = 0.25, 95% CI: 0.11-0.59), but a longer catheter insertion time (MD = 26.89, 95% CI: 5.28-48.50). For the secondary outcomes, DRA was associated with a shorter haemostasis time and reduced waveform instability, with no significant differences in first-attempt success rate or pain scores. Subgroup analysis showed a higher first-attempt success rate in patients aged ≤ 65 years (RR = 1.14, 95% CI: 1.02-1.28). DRA catheterization for invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring appears to be associated with fewer complications and more stable arterial waveform acquisition than CRA catheterization, despite a longer insertion time. DRA may represent a feasible alternative in surgical and intensive care settings; however, further high-quality studies are needed to confirm its long-term safety and generalizability.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Cross-kingdom dynamics of the subgingival bacteriome and mycobiome: A pilot study on the effects of a novel HA-H₂O₂-Glycine formulation to treat periodontitis.

OBJECTIVES: Traditional periodontal therapy primarily focuses on bacterial biofilm control; however, recent evidence also suggests a critical role for the oral mycobiome. This study evaluated the clinical and ecological impact of a novel mouthwash formulation containing hyaluronic acid (HA), hydrogen peroxide (H2O2), and glycine on periodontal patients METHODS: This prospective, randomized split-mouth trial included 13 adult participants with periodontitis treated with HA-H2O2-glycine formula (BMG0703A) used twice a day for seven days. Subgingival plaque samples were collected from periodontal pocket and healthy control sites at baseline (T0) and one-week post-treatment (T1). Microbial and fungal communities were characterized using Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) of the 16S rRNA and ITS2 regions. Linear Mixed Models (LMM) and Spearman correlation were used to assess taxonomic shifts and cross-kingdom relationships. RESULTS: Sequencing revealed a promising ecological shift: the bacteriome shifted from anaerobic dominance (Olsenella, Peptostreptococcus) toward a health-associated aerobic profile, with Rothia near-doubling (11.91% to 22.68%). The mycobiome underwent a "normalization" effect: Candida abundance decreased significantly (22.8% to 9.1%), while fungal Shannon diversity in pockets returned to healthy-site levels. Inter-kingdom analysis identified antagonistic relationships between expanding commensal bacteria and opportunistic fungi, suggesting that the intervention may help re-establish a protective bacterial niche. CONCLUSIONS: The HA-H2O2-glycine formulation seems to facilitate a rapid, cross-kingdom modulation of the subgingival niche. By reducing anaerobic pathogens and normalizing the mycobiome it appear to induce short-term changes, suggesting potential as adjunctive strategy in periodontal management. CLINICAL SIGNIFICANCE: The present work underlines the possible cross-Kingdom effects of a novel compound.

Humans↗

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

Pharmacological therapies for the prevention of fractures in men.

RATIONALE: Pharmacological therapies for fracture prevention usually target osteoporosis, a skeletal disorder characterised by compromised bone mass or quality (or both). As most participants in osteoporosis trials are women, a review of pharmacological therapies for fracture prevention in men was warranted. OBJECTIVES: To determine the benefits and harms of bisphosphonates, parathyroid (PTH) or parathyroid-related protein (PTHrP) analogues, denosumab, and romosozumab therapy for the prevention of fractures in men. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and WHO ICTRP) until 14 October 2025, with no restrictions on date or language of publication. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials that compared bisphosphonates, PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab (alone or with calcium or vitamin D, or both) with placebo, other drugs, or non-pharmacological therapies in men aged 50 years or older. Our primary comparison was bisphosphonates versus placebo. OUTCOMES: Critical outcomes were incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, other (not hip or vertebral) fractures, disability, participants with adverse events, study withdrawals due to adverse events, and participants with serious adverse events. Our primary time point was the final time point reported in the trials. RISK OF BIAS: We used Cochrane's RoB 2 tool to assess risk of bias. SYNTHESIS METHODS: We used a random-effects model for meta-analysis employing the Mantel-Haenszel approach, and the DerSimonian and Laird method to estimate between-trial variance. We assessed the certainty of evidence using GRADE. INCLUDED STUDIES: Seventeen trials (4132 participants) met our inclusion criteria. The average age of participants ranged from 52 to 73 years. Twelve trials used a placebo comparator versus bisphosphonate (7 trials, 2548 participants), PTH or PTHrP analogues (4 trials, 569 participants), denosumab (1 trial, 240 participants), and romosozumab (1 trial, 244 participants). For the other planned comparisons, a bisphosphonate was compared to vitamin D/vitamin D analogues (2 trials, 434 participants), to calcitonin (1 trial, 32 participants), to PTH or PTHrP analogues (1 trial, 19 participants), or to another bisphosphonate (1 trial, 301 participants), and one trial compared a bisphosphonate plus calcium to calcium tablets alone (46 participants). SYNTHESIS OF RESULTS: Placebo-controlled trials were largely susceptible to bias in selection of the reported result (83%), while most trials without a placebo control were also susceptible to bias arising from the randomisation process (100%) and in measurement of the outcome (80%). We are very uncertain about the effect of bisphosphonates on the incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, or other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures compared to placebo at the final follow-up (up to two years). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once for risk of bias, twice for imprecision (very low event rates), and once for suspected publication bias. The certainty of evidence for incidence of other fractures was further downgraded for indirectness, as it was unclear if hip fractures were also included in the outcome. At up to two years, 2/875 participants (2 per 1000) in the bisphosphonate group reported hip fractures compared with 2/760 (3 per 1000) in the placebo group (risk ratio (RR) 0.73, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06 to 8.51; I² = 36%; 4 trials, 1635 participants); 5/1021 (4/1000) participants in the bisphosphonate group had a symptomatic vertebral fracture compared to 7/855 (8/1000) participants in the placebo group (RR 0.49, 95% CI 0.14 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 5 trials, 1876 participants); 25/1130 participants (16/1000) in the bisphosphonate group reported other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures compared to 19/913 participants (21/1000) in the placebo group (RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.45; I² = 0%; 6 trials, 2043 participants). Bisphosphonates probably do not increase the risk of adverse events: 1024/1374 participants (746/1000) receiving bisphosphonates reported adverse events compared to 826/1174 participants (704/1000) receiving placebo (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.19; I² = 75%; 7 trials, 2548 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) or serious adverse events: 329/1329 participants (272/1000) receiving bisphosphonate reported serious adverse events compared to 323/1128 participants (286/1000) receiving placebo (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.08; I² = 0%; 6 trials, 2457 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once due to potential bias for adverse events and serious adverse events. We are very uncertain if bisphosphonates result in more withdrawals due to adverse events: 41/1374 participants (25/1000) in the bisphosphonate group withdrew due to adverse events compared with 43/1174 participants (37/1000) in the placebo group (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.18; I² = 37%; 7 trials, 2548 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence once for risk of bias, once for indirectness, and once for imprecision. No trial reported disability. We are very uncertain about the effects of PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab compared to placebo on fracture outcomes. We are very uncertain about the effects of PTH/PTHrP analogues on total adverse events, withdrawals due to adverse events, and serious adverse events. Denosumab may not increase the risk of adverse events or serious adverse events compared to placebo, while the evidence for withdrawals due to adverse events is very uncertain. Romosozumab probably does not increase the risk of adverse events and may not increase the risk of serious adverse events or result in more withdrawals due to adverse events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are very uncertain about the effects of bisphosphonates compared to placebo on the incidence of hip fractures, symptomatic vertebral fractures, or other (non-hip non-vertebral) fractures in men at up to two years of use. Bisphosphonates probably do not increase the risk of adverse events or serious adverse events, and we are very uncertain if they result in more withdrawals due to adverse events. We downgraded the certainty of evidence for indirectness, imprecision (low event rate), and serious risk of bias in selection of the reported result, as it was unclear if all studies fully reported every fracture. We found similar results for PTH or PTHrP analogues, denosumab, or romosozumab versus placebo. Larger, longer placebo-controlled studies are needed to determine whether pharmacological therapies are beneficial for reducing fractures in men. FUNDING: This Cochrane review had no dedicated funding. REGISTRATION: Protocol (2021): https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD014707.

Humans↗