SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Blinding assessment”

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.

710 records · Page 2Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of alixorexton, a selective orexin 2 receptor agonist for narcolepsy type 1 (Vibrance-1): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: The clinical potential of orexin 2 receptor (OX2R) agonism for improving measures of wakefulness and cataplexy in patients with narcolepsy type 1 has been described in a phase 2 study. Here, we aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of alixorexton, another oral OX2R agonist, in narcolepsy type 1. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial, adult participants (aged 18-70 years) with narcolepsy type 1 were recruited from 46 hospitals and private research centres across the USA, Europe, and Australia. Participants were centrally randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) in blocks of four via an interactive response technology system stratified by region and baseline weekly cataplexy rate (WCR) to receive 4 mg, 6 mg, or 8 mg tablets of alixorexton or placebo once daily for 6 weeks, followed by an optional 7-week open-label extension. Participants had narcolepsy type 1, diagnosed per the International Classification of Sleep Disorders, Third Edition, and confirmed by overnight polysomnography and the Multiple Sleep Latency Test or cerebrospinal hypocretin-1 concentrations. The sponsor, assessors, investigators, and participants were masked during the randomised double-blind treatment period. Efficacy and safety assessments were conducted in participants who received at least one dose of study drug. The primary endpoint was change from baseline to week 6 in mean sleep latency (MSL) on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT). Safety endpoints included treatment-emergent adverse events. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06358950) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between May 24, 2024, and May 5, 2025, 153 individuals were screened and 92 participants were randomly assigned to receive alixorexton 4 mg (n=23), 6 mg (n=22), 8 mg (n=24), or placebo (n=23). Mean age was 33·5 years (SD 12·1), 57 (62%) were women, and 35 (38%) were men. At week 6, the observed MSL on the MWT was 2·3 min (SD 2·7) for placebo, 24·0 min (8·7) for alixorexton 4 mg, 25·9 min (9·4) for 6 mg, and 28·2 min (11·4) for 8 mg. Alixorexton improved MSL on the MWT, with a least-squares mean placebo-corrected change from baseline of 22·2 min (95% CI 17·2-27·2) for alixorexton 4 mg, 24·1 min (19·0-29·1) for 6 mg, and 26·0 min (21·0-31·0) for 8 mg (adjusted p=0·0099 for 4 mg, adjusted p<0·0001 for 6 mg and 8 mg). Treatment-emergent adverse events occurring in at least 5% of participants given alixorexton and more frequently than those given placebo up to week 6 were pollakiuria (38 [55%]), insomnia (19 [28%]), salivary hypersecretion (17 [25%]), micturition urgency (ten [14%]), blurred vision (ten [14%]), and hyperhidrosis (five [7%]). INTERPRETATION: In this phase 2 trial, once-daily oral alixorexton provided clinically meaningful improvements at 6 weeks for participants with narcolepsy type 1, including in wakefulness, excessive daytime sleepiness, and cataplexy. The treatment was generally well tolerated, with adverse events consistent with the known on-target effects of OX2R agonists. Together, these findings support the further phase 3 evaluation of alixorexton as a potential therapeutic option for people with narcolepsy type 1. FUNDING: Alkermes.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of adjunctive bifrontal tDCS on depressive symptoms and cognitive performance in major depressive disorder: A randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled crossover pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for antidepressant effects of transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) in major depressive disorder (MDD) is heterogeneous, and cognitive effects remain uncertain. We compared depressive symptoms and DSST performance during active and sham bifrontal tDCS in medicated outpatients with MDD and baseline HAMD-17 ≥ 15. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, sham-controlled crossover pilot trial, adults with MDD and inadequate response to an adequate antidepressant trial were assigned to active→sham or sham→active tDCS sequences while continuing antidepressants. Each period comprised 10 sessions over 2 weeks. Active stimulation was delivered at 2 mA for 20 min (anode F3, cathode F4); sham used the same montage with brief ramping only. No washout interval was used. No washout interval was used. The primary outcome was HAMD-17; secondary outcomes were DSST and CGI ratings. RESULTS: Of 38 randomized participants, 32 completed both periods and were analyzed per protocol. HAMD-17 scores were lower during active than sham stimulation (mean difference -3.63, 95% CI -5.86 to -1.40; p = 0.002), but the condition-by-sequence interaction was significant (p = 0.026). No condition effect was observed for DSST (p = 0.261) or CGI-Severity (p = 1.000); CGI-Improvement was strongly sequence-dependent (p < 0.001). In an exploratory first-period analysis, adjusted T1 HAMD-17 scores were lower in the active-first group (adjusted difference -4.90, 95% CI -7.92 to -1.87; p = 0.003). Adverse effects were mild and transient. CONCLUSIONS: Active tDCS was associated with lower HAMD-17 scores, but the pooled contrast was order-dependent and cannot be interpreted as a definitive treatment effect. No DSST benefit was observed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TQC3721, an innovative, dual PDE3 and PDE4 inhibitor, in healthy subjects and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase I and IIa clinical trials.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: TQC3721 is a novel inhaled dual phosphodiesterase (PDE3/4) inhibitor designed to provide bronchodilation and anti-inflammatory effects for chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD). EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH: First-in-human randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase I (SAD: 0.2 to 24 mg single dose; MAD: 12 mg once daily (QD) for 7 days in healthy subjects) and phase IIa studies (0.75 to 6 mg once or twice daily for 4 weeks in moderate-to-severe patients with COPD) were conducted. Primary outcomes included safety, pharmacokinetics (PKs) and pharmacodynamics (PDs), change from baseline of forced expiratory volume in the first second [FEV1], and FEV1 at 12 and 24 h post-dose on days 1 and 28. KEY RESULTS: TQC3721 was rapidly absorbed (median Tmax of 0.25 to 0.5 h), mainly by pulmonary absorption rather than gastrointestinal absorption, along with low systemic exposure and lack of significant accumulation. TQC3721 demonstrated favourable safety profiles in healthy subjects and patients with COPD. In patients with COPD, TQC3721 produced rapid and outstanding bronchodilation effect sustained over 12 h post-administration, with FEV1 peaking at approximately 2 h post-dose and returning to baseline levels by 12 h, which supports a twice-daily dosing regimen for the future, and peak FEV₁ improvements ranging from 186 to 272 ml across dose groups after 4 weeks of treatment. Moreover, twice-daily 3 and 6 mg regimens were recommended for further clinical study. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Pharmacokinetic features, significant bronchodilation effects and overall favourable safety characteristics support further clinical development of TQC3721 as a potential dual-mechanism therapy for COPD.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid surgery: a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common complication following thyroid surgery, often exacerbated by opioid use. Oliceridine, a novel G protein-biased μ-opioid receptor agonist, may reduce opioid-related adverse events. This study aimed to compare the impact of oliceridine versus sufentanil on the incidence and severity of PONV in patients undergoing thyroid surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled trial conducted between May 2025 and February 2026, 232 patients scheduled for thyroid surgery were randomly assigned to receive either oliceridine or sufentanil for intraoperative analgesia. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV during the first 48 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included PONV severity, need for rescue anti-emetics, postoperative pain scores, recovery quality, and other adverse events. RESULTS: The incidence of PONV within 48 h postoperatively was significantly lower in the oliceridine group [13/107 (12%)] compared with the sufentanil group [31/110 (28%)] (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.17-0.72, p = 0.006). Postoperative pain scores, rescue analgesia requirements, and Quality of Recovery-15 scores were comparable between the two groups (p > 0.05). Besides, exploratory unadjusted analyses revealed fewer rescue anti-emetics: O group 8/107 (8%) vs S group 25/110 (23%) (OR = 0.27, 95% CI: 0.12-0.64, p = 0.002); and less abdominal distension: O group 4/107 (4%) vs S group 19/110 (17%) (OR = 0.19, 95% CI: 0.06-0.57, p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: For young ASA I-II patients undergoing thyroid surgery, oliceridine yields adequate postoperative analgesia and lower PONV rates versus sufentanil. Additional trials involving high-intensity surgical procedures are needed to confirm consistent equivalence.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of multistrain probiotic supplementation on hepatic function and anthropometric parameters in patients with metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease: a double-blind, randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is increasingly prevalent on a global scale. The gut microbiota is integral to its pathogenesis, prompting extensive research into microbiota modulation as a potential adjunctive therapeutic strategy. AIM: The study aimed to evaluate the effect of multistrain probiotics supplementation on hepatic function in patients with MASLD in a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial. The primary outcomes were changes in Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4) and fatty liver index (FLI). Secondary outcomes included changes in anthropometric parameters, selected biochemical markers, and other liver-related indices. METHODS: A total of 64 patients with MASLD were randomly assigned to two groups receiving either placebo (C) or a probiotic mixture (PRO) containing the following bacterial strains: 50% Lactococcus lactis Rosell-1058, 25% Lacticaseibacillus casei Rosell-215, 12.5% Lactobacillus helveticus Rosell-52, 12.5% Bifidobacterium bifidum Rosell-71 for 12 wk. RESULTS: Significant group × time interactions were observed for FIB-4 (Q = 0.007), with reduction in the PRO group and increase in the C group (-0.05 vs. 0.10; P = 0.002). No significant interaction was found for FLI (Q = 0.942). Significant group × time interactions were also observed for aspartate aminotransferase (-2.87 vs. 1.87 U/L; Q = 0.003) and APRI (-0.03 vs. 0.02; Q = 0.001), favoring the PRO group (P < 0.001 for both). No significant changes were observed in anthropometric parameters, glucose levels, or lipid profile. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MASLD, the 12-wk probiotic supplementation had a modest but statistically significant effect on FIB-4, aspartate aminotransferase, and APRI, with no significant effect on FLI or anthropometric and metabolic parameters. These findings suggest that this probiotic formulation may have potential benefits for liver function in MASLD. However, long-term studies incorporating imaging-based and histological endpoints are required to determine the clinical significance of these findings.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of oral JMKX003002 in Chinese healthy participants: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single- and multiple-ascending dose, and food-effect phase I clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharma-codynamics (PD) of the sodium-hydrogen exchanger 3 (NHE3) inhibitor JMKX003002 in Chinese healthy participants. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase I, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included a single-ascending dose (SAD) study with seven cohorts (1 mg [n = 4] and 5, 20, 50, 75, 100, or 125 mg [n = 8]), a food-effect (FE) study with six sequence groups (25 mg twice daily, n = 4), and a multiple-ascending dose (MAD) study with two cohorts (10 mg or 20 mg twice daily, n = 10). RESULTS: JMKX003002 was well-tolerated, with mostly mild treatment-related adverse events. One Grade 3 diarrhoea occurred in each of the 50 mg and 125 mg groups. No serious adverse events were reported, and no participants discontinued or withdrew due to treatment-emergent adverse events. Most plasma samples were below the limit of quantification (0.2 ng/mL), with only transient detection of low concentrations, indicating low systemic exposure. JMKX003002 was primarily excreted in stool (79.9% recovered) and was undetectable in urine. The PD results consistently showed decreased urinary sodium and phosphorus, along with increased stool sodium and phosphorus, compared to baseline across all three studies. One day after discontinuation, stool sodium and phosphorus remained elevated relative to baseline in the MAD study. Mixed-effects model analysis in the FE study demonstrated significant food effect on stool sodium and phosphorus excretion. CONCLUSION: JMKX003002 exhibited favorable safety and tolerability with minimal systemic exposure. It effectively increased sodium and phosphorus excretion in stool. These promising findings warrant further investigation of JMKX003002 to evaluate its clinical benefits. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2300070473). Registered on April 13, 2023; prospectively registered.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of Elagolix Versus Dienogest for Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Endometriosis Pain: A Phase III, Multicentric, Double-Blind, Active-Controlled, Non-Inferiority Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of elagolix with dienogest in women with moderate-to-severe endometriosis-associated pain. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, parallel-group, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase III study. SETTING: Nineteen clinical centres across India. STUDY POPULATION: Women (18-49 years) diagnosed with endometriosis and experiencing moderate-to-severe pain. METHODS: Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive oral elagolix (150 mg once daily) or dienogest (2 mg once daily) for 24 weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in endometriosis-related pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]) from baseline to Day 85. Secondary outcomes included changes in NRS (Day 169), dysmenorrhoea, non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) scores (Days 85 and 169), rescue medication use, patient global impression of change (PGIC), adverse events and bone mineral density. RESULTS: Of 340 patients screened, 230 were randomised (115 per group). At Day 85, both arms showed similar reductions in NRS pain scores with a treatment difference of 0.04 (95% CI: -0.3, 0.37) [p = 0.9747] demonstrating non-inferiority as upper 95% CI was below pre-specified margin of 1.5. At Day 169, both arms showed comparable improvements in overall pain, dysmenorrhoea and NMPP from baseline (p = 0.9372, p = 0.8884, and p = 0.9616, respectively). Rescue medication use and PGIC were comparable between treatment arms. Adverse event incidence was similar (elagolix: 14.8%; dienogest: 19.1%), with no serious TEAEs or discontinuations. No significant bone mineral density changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Elagolix demonstrated non-inferiority to dienogest with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, supporting its use in managing endometriosis-associated pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: CTRI/2023/01/049292.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effect of an oral complementary medicine combination for symptomatic knee osteoarthritis: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: Many individuals use complementary medicine therapies for osteoarthritis, despite limited scientific supporting evidence. These therapies have demonstrated anti-inflammatory, antioxidative, and chondroprotective effects via different molecular pathways, suggesting potential therapeutic benefits. This trial aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a novel oral complementary medicine combination in adults with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis at 12 weeks. DESIGN: The 12-week, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled ATLAS trial was conducted in Australia from July 2024 to April 2025 (ACTRN12623000380695). Eligible participants were aged ≥40 years with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis and radiographic Kellgren-Lawrence grade ≥2. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive the complementary medicine combination, comprising a total daily dose of Boswellia serrata extract 250 mg, pine bark extract 100 mg, methylsulfonylmethane 1500 mg, curcumin 500 mg, and piperine 5 mg, or placebo. The primary outcome was the 12-week change in knee pain (0-100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS)). A 95% confidence interval excluding differences >18 mm between groups was interpreted as the absence of a clinically meaningful difference. Harms were monitored weekly. RESULTS: Eighty-four participants were recruited (mean [SD], age 63.7 [8.0] years, BMI 29.0 [5.5] kg/m2), and 57% were female. At 12-weeks, both groups (intention-to-treat population: complementary medicine, n=42; placebo, n=41) showed a decrease in VAS pain (least squares means: complementary medicine 20.1 mm vs placebo 20.3 mm), however with no difference between groups: 0.16 mm (95% CI -6.81 to 7.12). The safety profile of experiencing any AE was similar between groups (risk difference, -3.4% [95% CI -24.8-17.9%]); and most adverse events were mild or moderate. Four participants experienced serious adverse events, unrelated to the treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The complementary medicine combination was not superior to placebo for improving pain over 12 weeks, and the evidence does not support the use of this combination to treat people with symptomatic knee osteoarthritis.

Humans↗

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

Phase IIB, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of Intravenous Defibrotide for the Prevention and Treatment of Respiratory Distress and Cytokine Release Syndrome in COVID-19.

INTRODUCTION: Endothelial dysfunction is key in COVID-19 pathogenesis. This randomized, double-blind phase IIb trial investigated continuous intravenous infusion of defibrotide in patients hospitalized with SARS-CoV-2 infection and respiratory failure. METHODS: One-hundred and fifty patients were randomized (2:1) to defibrotide or placebo, stratified by disease severity (WHO COVID-19 severity scale 4/5 vs. 6). The primary endpoint was clinical improvement time (days from first improvement through Day 30). RESULTS: Median clinical improvement time was not significantly different with defibrotide versus placebo (15.0 [IQR: 0-24] vs. 20.0 [IQR: 9-25] days; p = 0.10). Day-30 (23.0% vs. 22.0%) and Day-60 (26.0% vs. 22.0%) mortality, reduction in mean fraction of inspired oxygen during treatment, and median duration of hospitalization did not differ with defibrotide versus placebo. Defibrotide demonstrated favorable safety, with no differences versus placebo in serious adverse events (34.0% vs. 36.0%), hypotension (16.0% vs. 12.0%), or hemorrhage (13.0% vs. 8.0%). Exploratory pre-specified biomarker analyses showed greater early d-dimer reduction and lymphocyte recovery with defibrotide, although these results require validation. CONCLUSION: Continuous intravenous infusion of defibrotide was safe but did not improve clinical outcomes in severe COVID-19. Further analyses will explore mechanistic actions and pharmacokinetics of defibrotide and the pathophysiology of endothelial dysfunction in COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT identifier: 2020-001409-21. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04348383.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of add-on topiramate vs. metformin on cardiometabolic profile in patients of schizophrenia on atypical antipsychotics with metabolic syndrome: an active-controlled, rater-blinded, parallel-design randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Metabolic syndrome is common among patients with schizophrenia, but current treatment options are limited, with metformin being the most studied. While placebo-controlled studies suggest potential benefits of topiramate, comparative efficacy and safety data are lacking. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of topiramate versus metformin for treating metabolic syndrome and reducing cardiovascular risks among patients with schizophrenia. METHODS: A randomised, open-label, parallel-group clinical trial was conducted on 60 patients of schizophrenia with metabolic syndrome, randomised equally to receive either topiramate (50 mg/day) or metformin (1000 mg/day) for eight weeks. Primary outcome was cardiovascular risk score (QRISK3), and secondary outcomes were LDL∶HDL ratio, insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), positive and negative syndrome scale (PANSS), Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and clinical global impression-Schizophrenia scale (CGI-SCH) scores. RESULTS: Over the study period, QRISK3 scores improved significantly in both groups [topiramate: MD = 0.61 (0.02 to 1.21), p = 0.04; metformin: MD = 0.45 (0.07 to 0.83), p = 0.02], with no significant between-group difference in unadjusted analysis (p = 0.648). However, ANCOVA adjusting for baseline QRISK3 revealed a significantly greater improvement in the topiramate group (β = -0.324, p = 0.043). Metformin showed significant within-group improvements in LDL: HDL ratio and HOMA-IR; however, ANCOVA adjusting for baseline HOMA-IR showed the between-group difference remained non-significant (β = -1.209, p = 0.078). Both groups showed significant improvements in PANSS and CGI-SCH scores, with no significant between-group differences in MoCA scores. A moderate correlation between the QRISK3 change, the PANSS change, and the CGI-SCH-I scores was observed in the topiramate group and the total population. Regression analysis identified PANSS change as a predictor of QRISK3 improvement. CONCLUSION: Topiramate demonstrated comparable, and on adjusted analysis superior, cardiovascular risk reduction compared to metformin, supporting its use as a viable alternative in the management of metabolic syndrome in patients with schizophrenia on atypical antipsychotics, particularly where metformin is contraindicated.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of RIPK1 inhibitor, SAR443820, in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (HIMALAYA): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: RIPK1, a protein regulating inflammatory signalling and cell death, is implicated in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) pathophysiology. SAR443820 is a selective, oral, CNS-penetrant, reversible RIPK1 inhibitor. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of SAR443820 in participants with ALS. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2 trial was conducted at 63 clinical sites in 13 countries (Belgium, Canada, China, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the Netherlands, Poland, Spain, Sweden, the UK, and the USA). Adults (aged 18-80 years) with a diagnosis of possible ALS, clinically probable ALS, clinically probable laboratory-supported ALS, or clinically definite ALS, in accordance with the revised El Escorial World Federation of Neurology criteria, were randomly assigned (2:1) by use of a stratified block design (blocks of three) to receive either 20 mg SAR443820 orally twice per day or matching placebo in the 24-week double-blind period. Randomisation was done centrally using interactive response technology and stratified by geographical region of trial site, region of ALS onset, use of riluzole, use of edaravone, and use of the combination of sodium phenylbutyrate and taurursodiol. Participants, care providers, investigators, and outcomes assessors were masked to trial intervention. The primary outcome was a change in ALS Functional Rating Scale Revised (ALSFRS-R) total score from baseline to week 24 and was calculated for all participants who had an ALSFRS-R total score available at baseline and at week 24. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned participants receiving one dose or more of trial intervention. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05237284) and was terminated early. FINDINGS: Between April 13, 2022, and July 17, 2023, 397 participants were screened and 305 randomly assigned to SAR443820 (n=203) or placebo (n=102); six were excluded from the primary analysis due to missing baseline ALSFRS-R values. Mean age was 56·9 years (SD 11·5); 183 (60%) participants were male and 122 (40%) were female. Least squares mean change in ALSFRS-R from baseline to week 24 was -6·73 (95% CI -7·48 to -5·98) for SAR443820 group (n=169) and -6·32 (-7·36 to -5·27) for placebo group (n=87). There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups (least squares mean difference -0·41 [95% CI -1·71 to 0·88]). Participants in the SAR443820 group had higher incidence of adverse events (171 [85%] of 202 vs placebo 80 [78%] of 102) and treatment discontinuations (28 [14%] of 202 vs placebo five [5%] of 102), with elevated hepatic enzymes being the most common cause. Nine deaths occurred in the double-blind period (seven [3%] of 202 in the SAR443820 group and two [2%] of 102 in the placebo group); none was attributed to SAR443820. INTERPRETATION: SAR443820 did not show clinical benefit and was associated with higher hepatic enzyme increase, indicating that further clinical development of SAR443820 in ALS is not warranted. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Humans↗

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

Dealcoholized muscadine wine improved skin elasticity and oxidative stress biomarkers without affecting gut microbiome in women over 40 in a randomized controlled trial.

Muscadine wine has a unique polyphenol profile distinct from that of common wine, and limited research exists on its health benefits. This study aimed to investigate the effects of intake of dealcoholized muscadine wine (DMW) on skin health, oxidative stress, inflammatory biomarkers, and the gut microbiome. Seventeen healthy women were randomly assigned to consume 300 mL of DMW or a placebo daily for 6 weeks, separated by a 3-week washout period, in a randomized, single-blinded, crossover design. Skin health parameters were measured on the face and forearm. Oxidative stress and inflammatory biomarkers were assessed in plasma. Fecal bacterial DNA was sequenced using shotgun sequencing. DMW did not affect UVB-induced erythema compared to placebo. However, it significantly decreased transepidermal water loss and increased facial gross elasticity. Skin elasticity significantly improved on the forearm, whereas other skin parameters were not affected. DMW significantly decreased plasma levels of matrix metalloproteinase-9 and advanced glycation end products compared with placebo. However, the abundance, diversity, and functions of the gut microbiome were not affected. Polyphenol-rich DMW administered for six weeks improved certain skin health parameters and reduced oxidative and inflammatory stress, without affecting the gut microbiome in healthy women.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A Triple-Blinded, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Hydromorphone vs. Fentanyl for Children Undergoing Tonsillectomy.

BACKGROUND: Tonsillectomy is one of the most frequently performed pediatric surgeries; however, little evidence guides the choice of intraoperative opioids in a population at an elevated risk for perioperative respiratory complications. This study tested the hypothesis that fewer children who received hydromorphone during tonsillectomy would require postoperative "rescue" opioids compared to children who received fentanyl. METHODS: We conducted a triple-blind, randomized, controlled trial to compare intravenous hydromorphone versus fentanyl in pediatric patients undergoing tonsillectomy. Children aged 2-15 years undergoing bilateral tonsillectomy or adenotonsillectomy were assigned (1:1) to receive hydromorphone (10 mcg/kg) or fentanyl (1 mcg/kg) intraoperatively. The primary endpoint was the number of patients who required rescue intravenous opioid analgesia following endotracheal extubation. Secondary endpoints included pain scores, pulse oximetry saturations, postoperative nausea, time in the recovery room, morphine milligram equivalents in the post-anesthesia care unit, and adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 188 children underwent randomization, and 180 were analyzed (90 in each group). The median age was 5 years (interquartile range: 3-7 years). Rescue intravenous opioid was administered to 48 (53%) children who received intraoperative hydromorphone and 66 (73%) children who received intraoperative fentanyl (difference, 20.0 percentage points; 95% confidence interval, 6.2-33.8) (p = 0.005). Children who received hydromorphone also had lower mean pain scores for the first 15 min postoperatively and lower median morphine milligram equivalents. The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study in children undergoing tonsillectomy found that intraoperative hydromorphone resulted in improved analgesia in the recovery room compared to fentanyl. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04230681.

Adolescent↗

PubMed2026

Effects of acute inflammatory challenge on anhedonia and social reward processing: A randomized controlled trial of endotoxin.

Anhedonia is a core feature of depression that reflects reward system dysfunction. Acute inflammatory challenge has been shown to induce transient anhedonia and reward processing deficits, but its effects on distinct components of social reward processes remain poorly understood. This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluated anhedonia and social reward responsivity following acute inflammatory challenge. Low-dose endotoxin (0.8 ng/kg body weight; n = 18) or placebo (same volume of 0.9% saline; n = 22) was administered to female adults (ages 25-44). Anhedonia (Snaith-Hamilton Pleasure Questionnaire) and blood samples for cytokine assessment were collected pre-infusion and 2 and 4 h post-infusion. Social reward motivation (wanting to engage in a social task) was assessed at a baseline eligibility visit and 2 h post-infusion. Sensitivity to positive social cues (attentional bias toward and recognition of happy faces) was assessed pre-infusion and 2 h post-infusion. Results showed that endotoxin increased anhedonic symptoms (p = .005) and decreased social motivation by 2 h post-infusion (p = .001); within the endotoxin condition, changes in both outcomes were associated with increases in TNF-α (p's < .04). A significant condition-by-time interaction for happy-face recognition (p = .011) was driven by increased accuracy in the placebo (p = .04) but not endotoxin (p = .43) condition. Endotoxin administration did not affect attentional bias toward happy faces. Findings suggest that acute inflammatory challenge induces anhedonia and reduces social motivation, with more limited effects on sensitivity to positive social cues, highlighting specific reward-related pathways through which immune activation may contribute to inflammation-associated depression. Future work could examine whether immune-related changes in social motivation contribute to motivational deficits in depression.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Nociception-guided opioid administration within multimodal analgesia for laparoscopic endometriosis surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

Women with endometriosis are at increased risk of severe postoperative pain due to nociceptive sensitization. While multimodal analgesia reduces opioid use, the added value of objective nociception monitoring remains unclear. This study evaluated whether NOL®-guided opioid titration improves perioperative outcomes within a standardized multimodal regimen. In this prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial, premenopausal women undergoing laparoscopic surgery for suspected endometriosis or adenomyosis were assigned to NOL®-guided analgesia or standard care based on clinical assessment. All patients received a standardized multimodal protocol. The primary outcome was total perioperative opioid consumption. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain scores (NRS) and PACU length of stay. Exploratory analyses assessed the association between preoperative pain (Mankoski Pain Scale, MPS) and postoperative outcomes. A total of 111 patients were analyzed (NOL®: n = 54; control: n = 57). Total perioperative opioid consumption did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference = 14 μg for Fentanyl and 52 μg for Remifentanil; p = 0.8). Surgery duration was an independent predictor of opioid use (p < 0.001) and PACU length of stay (p = 0.01), whereas treatment group had no significant effect. Postoperative pain scores were comparable between groups at all time points. NOL®-derived metrics were not associated with opioid consumption or pain. Higher preoperative MPS scores independently predicted higher pain scores in the late PACU phase. NOL®-guided opioid titration did not reduce perioperative opioid consumption or improve early postoperative outcomes compared with standard multimodal analgesia in women undergoing laparoscopic surgery for endometriosis.

Humans↗

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↗