SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Pain threshold”

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.

298 records · Page 17Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Comparison between the thoracoabdominal rebalancing (TAR) method and the slow expiratory flow acceleration (SEFA) technique in preterm newborns: protocol for a randomised controlled clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Preterm newborns (PTNB) present respiratory immaturity and increased susceptibility to muscle fatigue. The thoracoabdominal rebalancing (TAR) method is a physiotherapeutic intervention developed in Brazil that aims to reorganise the synergy of the thoracoabdominal muscles and reduce the effort of the respiratory muscles, a benefit that is particularly important for PTNB; however, the evidence regarding its effectiveness in this population remains inconclusive. Therefore, this study aims to compare the short-term effects of the TAR method and the slow expiratory flow acceleration (SEFA) technique in improving respiratory distress and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) in PTNB admitted to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The study will be a randomised, controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, single-blind clinical trial. 68 participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two treatment groups. Group 1 will receive four handling techniques of the TAR method for 10 min, followed by the rhinopharyngeal retrograde clearance with saline instillation (RRC+I) technique. Group 2 will receive the SEFA technique for 10 min, also followed by RRC+I. Primary outcomes are respiratory distress and SpO2. Secondary outcomes are respiratory rate (RR), heart rate (HR), pain, behaviour and diaphragmatic excursion. Assessments will be conducted by a blinded researcher at baseline (T0), immediately after the intervention (T1) and at the 30-minute follow-up (T2). Data will be described using measures of central tendency and dispersion and absolute and relative frequencies. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed, and intragroup and intergroup comparisons will be assessed using generalised estimating equations (GEE). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Research Ethics Committee of the Faculty of Health Sciences of Trairi of the Federal University of Rio Grande do Norte approved this study (number 8,055,786). The results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journal publications, scientific conferences presentations and knowledge translation to the public. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: This study was registered on Brazilian Registry of Clinical Trials (ReBEC) on 9 January 2026 (RBR-3gbsyc2).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Transcranial Motor Evoked Potential Monitoring Using Propofol-Fentanyl Versus Desflurane-Dexmedetomidine Anesthesia During Spinal Cord Tumor Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients undergoing resection of spinal cord tumours require intraoperative neuromonitoring. Transcranial electrical stimulation is used to record myogenic responses during surgery. This study aimed to compare the effect of 2 anaesthetic regimens, propofol/fentanyl versus desflurane/dexmedetomidine, on the ability to record MEPs with an amplitude of 50 µV or greater. Our secondary outcome compared intraoperative haemodynamics, recovery profile, and postoperative analgesia between the groups. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blinded, open-label, single-centre, randomized controlled trial of 50 adult patients undergoing spinal cord tumour resection with TcmMEP monitoring. Patients were randomized to 2 groups: Group P (n=25) received intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and fentanyl; group D (n=25) received desflurane and dexmedetomidine. RESULTS: We recorded TcmMEP's in 80% of group P and 76% group D (95% CI: -23% to 31%, P =1.00). The time in minutes for spontaneous breathing (21.04±11.31 vs. 8.00±3.42 [8.29-,17.79, P =0.01]), extubation (31.56±17.56 vs. 10.84±3.99 [13.48-27.96; P =0.01]), emergence (33.68±18.11 vs. 10.92±4.01 [15.30-30.22, P =0.001]), discharge readiness (45.00±25.24 vs. 15.56±6.08 [19.00-39.88; P =0.001]) and requirement of first analgesia (136.6±108.04 vs. 230.8±81.33) (-148.58 to -39.82; P =0.01) was lower in group D compared with group P. Postoperative analgesia assessed using the Visual Analogue Score was lower in group D compared with group P at 12 and 24 hours. (1.68±1.18 vs. 0.64±1.31 [0.33-1.74 P =0.001]) :1.4±0.95 vs. 0.36± 0.70 (0.56-1.51; P =0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found similar rates of successful TcMEP monitoring using desflurane-dexmedetomidine and propofol-fentanyl. Patients who received desflurane-dexmedetomidine had reduced emergence time, discharge readiness, and lower pain scores in the postoperative period.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Early and late CTCAE and patient-reported outcomes following lung cancer radiotherapy: A sex-stratified descriptive analysis from the REQUITE cohort.

BACKGROUND: Long-term prospective data on lung cancer patients treated with radiotherapy are limited, restricting understanding of outcomes and sex-specific characteristics. The multicentre REQUITE study provides standardized follow-up data from an international cohort. METHODS: We analysed longitudinal data from 530 lung cancer patients treated with radical radiotherapy (sequential or concurrent chemoradiotherapy, or stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) between 2014 and 2017 at 16 centres in Europe and the USA. Healthcare professionals prospectively recorded 21 pulmonary, oesophageal, neurological, cardiac, and skin adverse events using CTCAE v4.0. Patient-reported outcomes assessed symptoms, quality-of-life, fatigue, and physical activity. Adverse event incidence was stratified by sex, radiotherapy technique, chemotherapy administration, smoking status, and other clinical factors. RESULTS: At 12 months, 309 patients were evaluable, with 151 having follow-up beyond one year. Pulmonary adverse events were most frequent (40% grade ≥ 2), mainly dyspnoea and cough. Women had higher rates of oesophagitis, and more frequently reported dysphagia, and chest wall pain, while men experienced a higher frequency of cardiac adverse events. Exploratory subgroup analyses identified significant sex-related differences in grade ≥ 3 pulmonary adverse events following SBRT and in overall grade ≥ 2 oesophageal adverse events among patients with clinical stage I-II and those aged >70 years. Patient-reported outcomes showed persistent fatigue and reduced physical activity, particularly in females. Symptom prevalence and severity varied by sex, age, treatment modality, smoking status, and clinical stage. CONCLUSION: The REQUITE-Lung cohort provides prospectively collected real-world data on radiotherapy-related adverse events in lung cancer patients. This study describes patterns of adverse events and patient-reported outcomes according to sex, age, and treatment characteristics. These findings are hypothesis-generating and may support future validation in independent and pooled datasets.

Patient-reported outcomes↗

PubMed2026

Health-Related quality of life (HRQoL) and health state utility values (HSUV) in patients with head and neck Cancer: A systematic review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Head and neck cancer (HNC) and its treatment can substantially impair speech, swallowing, eating, appearance, and social functioning, resulting in persistent reductions in health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Although the EuroQol 5-Dimensions questionnaire (EQ-5D) is widely used to assess generic HRQoL and derive health state utility values (HSUVs), EQ-5D-based evidence in HNC has not been comprehensively synthesized. This study aimed to summarize EQ-5D-based HRQoL and HSUVs in HNC, estimate pooled utility and EQ-VAS scores, explore subgroup differences, and identify predictors of poorer HRQoL. METHODS: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD420261307907). PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Scopus were searched from inception to February 10, 2026. Studies reporting baseline EQ-5D utility values and/or EQ-VAS scores in patients with HNC were included. Random-effects meta-analyses using the DerSimonian-Laird (DL) estimator with the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) adjustment were performed to pool mean scores. Between-study variance (τ2) and 95 % prediction intervals (PI) were calculated to capture parameter dispersion. Subgroup analyses were conducted across clinical and methodological vectors. RESULTS: Twenty studies involving 7,403 patients were included. The pooled mean EQ-5D utility score was 0.79 (95 % CI: 0.75-0.83; τ2 = 0.0011; 95 % PI: 0.72-0.86). The pooled mean EQ-VAS score was 69.36 (95 % CI: 65.71-73.01; τ2 = 38.4586; 95 % PI: 55.11-83.61). Extreme heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 96.4 % and 97.1 %, respectively). Utility values were significantly higher in studies utilizing the EQ-5D-5 L than the EQ-5D-3 L version (0.82 vs. 0.76). By tumor subsite, nasopharyngeal cancer showed the highest utility value (0.85, exploratory), whereas oral cancer demonstrated the lowest (0.73). Adjusted multivariable models revealed that advanced stage, high treatment intensity, severe pharyngolaryngeal pain, dysphagia, malnutrition, and older age were robust predictors of poorer HRQoL. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with HNC experience substantial and persistent HRQoL impairment, with meaningful variations driven by tumor subsites and instrument versions. In light of the extreme heterogeneity, these pooled findings establish a macro-level, broad reference estimate rather than a fixed target. These parameters directly inform localized survivorship care planning, health technology evaluations, and cost-utility decision-making modeling in head and neck oncology.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Perioperative Depression and Anxiety Care in Older Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Depression and anxiety are common among older adults undergoing surgery and are associated with adverse postoperative outcomes. However, effective tailored perioperative mental health interventions are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate a perioperative intervention to optimize mental health. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A single-blind, hybrid, type 1, effectiveness-implementation randomized clinical trial was conducted (November 1, 2022, to March 31, 2025), with 3-month postoperative follow-up, at a US academic and community practice hospital network. Participants were 60 years or older; scheduled for cardiac, oncologic, or orthopedic surgery; and had clinically meaningful symptoms of depression and/or anxiety based on the Patient Health Questionnaire-Anxiety and Depressive Symptom (PHQ-ADS) scale. A total of 3159 patients were screened for eligibility, with 1518 ineligible, 1079 declining participation, and 236 excluded for other reasons. A total of 326 patients were enrolled and randomized (1:1), with 20 excluded after surgery cancelation. INTERVENTION: Participants were assigned to receive a perioperative intervention combining psychological management and pharmacologic optimization or enhanced usual care (materials for self-managing symptoms). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in PHQ-ADS score from baseline to 3 months after surgery. Other outcomes included persistent postsurgical pain, delirium, falls, quality of life, patient satisfaction, length of stay, and rehospitalizations. Implementability was evaluated through semistructured interviews and reach, acceptability, feasibility, appropriateness, and fidelity measures. RESULTS: A total of 306 older adults were included in analysis (mean [SD] age, 68.5 [6.1] years; 209 [68.3%] female; 153 randomized to intervention and 153 randomized to enhanced usual care): 102 cardiac, 100 oncologic, and 104 orthopedic patients. Participants' mean (SD) baseline PHQ-ADS score was 18.5 (7.4). At 3 months, there was a significant decrease in PHQ-ADS scores in the intervention group compared with the enhanced usual care group (mean difference, 2.20; 95% CI, 0.16-4.24; P = .03). Effects varied by surgical subgroups (oncologic patients: mean difference, 4.93; 95% CI, 1.51-8.36; P = .005; cardiac patients: mean difference, 2.68; 95% CI, -0.98 to 6.35; P = .15; and orthopedic patients: mean difference, -1.11; 95% CI, -4.62 to 2.40; P = .54). Patients and interventionists perceived the intervention as appropriate, with high-fidelity delivery and broad reach across the target population. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In this randomized clinical trial, psychological management and pharmacologic optimization reduced anxiety and depression in older adults undergoing surgery. Future studies should assess reproducibility and determine which patients benefit most. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT05575128, NCT05685511, and NCT05697835.

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

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

GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Musculoskeletal Outcomes: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are increasingly used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and obesity, but their effects on musculoskeletal health remain completely misunderstood. OBJECTIVE: This systematic review/meta-analysis aims to synthesise clinical data on the effects of GLP-1 RAs on key relevant bone, muscle, and joint outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (both via Ovid® platform) and Embase were searched from inception to March 2025 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or real-world evidence (RWE) studies to be included. This bibliographic search was completed manually. A random-effect model meta-analysis was performed for any outcome reported in at least 2 studies. Subgroup analyses were performed on the type of GLP-1 RAs, type of comparator used and study design. Sensitivity analyses (i.e., leave-out sensitivity analyses and analyses restricted to the most adjusted effect estimate) were performed to test the robustness of the data. The strength of evidence was assessed using GRADE. This work has been performed in adherence with PRISMA statement. (PROSPERO Record ID: CRD420251024082). RESULTS: From 1148 potentially relevant references, 60 articles (46 RCTs, 13 RWE studies and 1 pharmacovigilance study, comprising 1,250,717 individuals) met our inclusion criteria. Different GLP-1 RAs were represented across the panel of studies, i.e., semaglutide, liraglutide, exenatide, dulaglutide, tirzepatide (dual agonist gastric inhibitory polypeptide [GIP]/GLP-1) and others. No effect on bone outcomes (i.e., bone mineral density [all sites] and fractures [all sites]) were observed when the meta-analytical models included the most adjusted effect size. Regarding muscle outcomes, a significant decrease of lean body mass/fat-free mass was consistently observed with GLP-1 RAs in the global model (k = 28, standardised mean difference [SMD] 0.52, 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.8; -0.23, I2 88%, p-value for heterogeneity <0.0001), which remained robust in all sensitivity analyses. Subgroup analyses showed that the effect was mainly driven by liraglutide and semaglutide, with a decrease in lean body mass/fat-free mass observed when GLP-1 RAs were compared with placebo. No publication bias was found. Regarding joint outcome, models revealed no significant change in The Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) pain, physical function and stiffness. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis is the first to investigate the effects of GLP-1 RAs on a large panel of musculoskeletal health outcomes. While no significant effects were observed on bone- or joint-related outcomes, GLP-1 RAs were associated with reductions in lean body mass/fat-free mass, although the certainty of evidence was low and these changes appeared largely related to weight loss. Whether these changes translate into clinically meaningful impairments in muscle function or physical performance remains uncertain. Further studies in this field, including those looking at muscle function, strength or performance and using multivariate models considering confounding are needed to better reinforce the models and final findings.

Journal Article↗

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

Adjuvant alectinib versus chemotherapy in resected ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ALINA): health-related quality-of-life and safety outcomes from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: For patients with resected, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), adjuvant alectinib significantly improved disease-free survival versus platinum-based chemotherapy in the global, phase 3, open-label, randomised ALINA trial. We report safety and health-related quality-of-life (HRQoL) outcomes from the ALINA trial. METHODS: Eligible patients aged 18 years or older with resected, ALK-positive, stage IB (≥4 cm)-IIIA NSCLC (per the American Joint Committee on Cancer and the Union for International Cancer Control Cancer Staging Manual 7th edition) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1 were randomly assigned (1:1) via a block-stratified randomisation method to receive oral alectinib (600 mg twice daily) for 24 months or intravenous platinum-based chemotherapy for four 3-week cycles. Randomisation was stratified according to disease stage and race. The primary endpoint, previously reported, was disease-free survival. Safety was a secondary endpoint and HRQoL was an exploratory endpoint. Safety was assessed by the investigator as per the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5·0 until 28 days after the last alectinib dose or chemotherapy cycle. HRQoL was assessed via the Short-Form 36-item health survey version 2 (SF-36v2) questionnaire at baseline, every 3 weeks to week 12, then every 12 weeks until disease recurrence, consent withdrawal, death, or week 96. Norm-based scoring was applied; clinically meaningful changes were defined using the SF-36v2 manual. Safety was assessed in the safety-evaluable population and HRQoL in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03456076) and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Aug 16, 2018, and Dec 8, 2021, 257 patients were assigned to receive alectinib (n=130) or chemotherapy (n=127). 123 (48%) patients were male and 134 (52%) were female; 143 (56%) were Asian. The safety-evaluable population comprised 128 patients who received alectinib and 120 patients who received chemotherapy; median duration of safety follow-up was 24·8 months (IQR 22·0-24·9) in the alectinib group and 3·7 months (IQR 3·7-3·8) in the chemotherapy group. The safety of adjuvant alectinib was generally consistent with its known profile. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were blood creatine phosphokinase increased (eight [6%] of 128), alanine aminotransferase increased (two [2%] of 128), and blood bilirubin increased (two [2%] of 128) in the alectinib group, and neutrophil count decreased (12 [10%] of 120), neutropenia (ten [8%] of 120), and nausea (five [4%] of 120) in the chemotherapy group. Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in two (2%; one each with appendicitis and pneumonitis) of 128 patients in the alectinib group and eight (7%) of 120 patients in the chemotherapy group ( most common were gastrointestinal disorders in three [3%] patients). No deaths due to adverse events were reported in either group. There were fewer discontinuations due to adverse events with alectinib (seven [5%]) versus chemotherapy (15 [13%]). A clinically meaningful difference in improvement from baseline was seen at week 12 for bodily pain, role physical, mental health, social functioning, and vitality SF-36v2 domains with alectinib; improvements in physical and mental HRQoL were maintained over 2 years of active treatment (at week 96, mean Mental Component Summary score: 49·9 [SD 10·4]; mean Physical Component Summary score: 48·8 [SD 7·2]) and reached levels similar to the general population (population norm: 50). INTERPRETATION: For patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC, adjuvant alectinib had a manageable safety profile; HRQoL improved and was maintained over 2 years of active treatment. Together with the disease-free survival benefit seen in ALINA, these data support adjuvant alectinib as an important new standard-of-care for patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC. FUNDING: F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Adult↗