Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Drug discovery”

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.

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

349 records · Page 20Linked to original sources
PubMed2026

Pain outcomes of pediatric circumcision patients following administration of pre-operative ketorolac: A randomized clinical trial.

INTRODUCTION: Circumcision is a common surgical intervention, and pain is the most common complaint. Poorly managed pain can increase morbidity and reduce patient and parent satisfaction. Ketorolac, a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID), provides analgesia and may be effective in reducing pain after circumcision in pediatric patients. STUDY OBJECTIVES: The primary objective was to determine the effect of pre-operative intravenous ketorolac versus normal saline placebo on parental perception of postoperative pain at 24 h. We also explored the effect of ketorolac on postoperative pain scores, incidence of bleeding, incidence of vomiting, and analgesic use. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded trial was conducted at a single tertiary children's hospital. Patients aged 1-17 presenting for circumcision were included and randomized to either normal saline injectate or ketorolac (0.5 mg/kg, maximum 30 mg). Postoperative delirium and pain scores were recorded in the post-anesthetic care unit. Parents completed the parents' postoperative pain measure (PPPM) at 24 h. The CONSORT criteria and checklist were used to guide reporting of this randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: A total of 100 participants were included. 50 participants were in each group. Mean (SD) PPPM score 24 h after normal saline and ketorolac was 6.1 (3.4) and 5.5 (3.3), respectively for a mean difference of -0.55 points [95% CI: -1.9 to 0.83; p = 0.427]. The mean (95% CI) fixed effect size of ketorolac on post anesthetic care unit reported Face, Leg, Activity, Cry, Consolability score was -0.17 (-0.77 to 0.43, p = 0.585) points, while the mean (95% CI) effect size of ketorolac on numerical rating scale was -1.2 (-2.2 to -0.18, p = 0.026) points. DISCUSSION: Pre-operative intravenous ketorolac, compared to normal saline placebo, did not result in a difference in parental perception of postoperative pain at 24 h after circumcision surgery. As part of exploratory analyses, those receiving ketorolac had modestly lower mean immediate postoperative pain scores, likely not of clinical importance. Ketorolac has often been avoided due to concerns of increased bleeding risk, however it is important to consider that there is no substantial evidence to support this. This is the first study to our knowledge evaluating the effect of ketorolac in pediatric circumcision patients. While the PPPM score is a family centered outcome, it is an indirect measurement of pediatric pain. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-operative intravenous ketorolac was not associated with lower parental reported pain scores at 24 h compared to normal saline placebo after pediatric circumcision surgery. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02973958.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Valproate vs levetiracetam in juvenile myoclonic epilepsy: systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Juvenile myoclonic epilepsy (JME) is a genetic generalized epilepsy syndrome with onset typically in adolescence and a chronic course requiring long-term antiseizure medications (ASMs). Valproate (VPA) is the most effective treatment for seizure control in JME but use is limited by metabolic, cognitive, and teratogenic adverse effects (AEs). Levetiracetam (LEV) is an alternative ASM when VPA is contraindicated or not tolerated. Comparisons of the efficacy and long-term tolerability of VPA and LEV remain limited. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis using PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook. We searched PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library from inception through January 2026 for studies in JME patients comparing LEV and VPA, and included randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies with ≥ 6 months of follow-up. Primary outcomes were seizure remission and ASM failure or treatment discontinuation. Secondary outcomes included, memory impairment, weight gain or obesity, dizziness, and overall AEs. Risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled using random-effects models. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic. RESULTS: Seven studies encompassing 1,009 patients were included. VPA was associated with higher pooled seizure remission rates compared with LEV (344 of 574 vs. 169 of 390; RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.27-1.63); however, substantial heterogeneity (I2 = 88.4%) limits confidence in this finding. VPA was associated with a lower risk of drug failure or treatment discontinuation (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54-0.86), with no heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%). VPA was also associated with a higher risk of memory impairment (RR 5.37, 95% CI 2.05-14.04; I2 = 74.5%) and weight gain or obesity (RR 6.40, 95% CI 3.64-11.26; I2 = 35.9%). No significant differences were observed between treatments regarding dizziness (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.61-1.37; I2 = 21.2%). Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of the pooled estimates. CONCLUSION: VPA was associated with higher seizure remission rates and lower treatment discontinuation compared with LEV; however, these findings must be interpreted with caution given the substantial heterogeneity, the predominance of observational studies, and the serious risk of bias identified in most included studies VPA also demonstrated lower rates of treatment discontinuation, despite a higher burden of cognitive impairment and weight gain. No relevant differences were observed regarding dizziness. Large-scale randomized trials with standardized outcome definitions and longer follow-up are needed to define the comparative risk-benefit profiles of LEV and VPA in JME.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Clopidogrel vs Aspirin According to Diabetes Mellitus: A Prespecified Analysis of the SMART-CHOICE 3 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Recent trials support the superior efficacy of clopidogrel compared to aspirin monotherapy after completion of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) in patients who have undergone percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). However, limited evidence is available in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of clopidogrel vs aspirin monotherapy according to the presence of DM. METHODS: This was a prespecified analysis of the SMART-CHOICE 3 trial, which was a multicenter, open-label, randomized controlled trial comparing clopidogrel vs aspirin monotherapy in patients with complex coronary lesions or high-risk clinical characteristics. From August 2020 to July 2023, a total of 5,506 patients who underwent PCI and standard DAPT duration and had complex coronary lesions, DM, or previous myocardial infarction, were randomized to clopidogrel or aspirin monotherapy groups. The primary endpoint was major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), which was defined as a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, or stroke. RESULTS: Of 5,506 patients, 2,089 had DM (1,039 in the clopidogrel group and 1,050 in the aspirin group). At a median follow-up of 2.3 years (IQR: 1.6-3.0 years), DM patients had a higher risk of MACCE compared to non-DM patients (6.8% vs 4.7%; HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.10-1.87; P = 0.008). Clopidogrel showed a significantly lower risk of MACCE than aspirin in DM patients (4.5% vs 9.1%; HR: 0.57, 95% CI: 0.38-0.86; P = 0.008). There was no significant interaction between DM and antiplatelet monotherapy regarding MACCE (P for interaction = 0.124). The risk of bleeding was comparable between the 2 groups in DM patients (2.9% vs 2.9%; HR: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.57-1.95; P = 0.855). CONCLUSIONS: Among DM patients who completed the standard duration of DAPT after PCI, clopidogrel monotherapy was associated with a lower risk of a composite of death from any cause, myocardial infarction, and stroke compared with aspirin monotherapy, without increased rates of bleeding. There was no significant interaction between DM and antiplatelet monotherapy with respect to MACCE. (SMART-CHOICE 3 [SMart Angioplasty Research Team: CHoice of Optimal Anti-Thrombotic Strategy in Patients Undergoing Implantation of Coronary Drug-Eluting Stents 3]; NCT04418479).

Humans↗
PubMed2026

The efficacy of modified psychodynamic psychotherapy for patients with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders in Germany: a prospective, single-centre, assessor-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: People with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders have difficulties in interpersonal functioning that remain insufficiently addressed by standard care. Despite long-standing clinical use, psychodynamic psychotherapy has little empirical support compared with other psychosocial treatments for people with schizophrenia-spectrum disorders. We evaluated the efficacy of Modified Psychodynamic Psychotherapy for Schizophrenia (MPP-S), a manualised treatment tailored to the interpersonal vulnerability characteristic of this population, plus treatment as usual (TAU), compared with TAU alone. METHODS: This prospective, single-centre, assessor-blinded, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial was conducted at the Psychiatric University Hospital of the Charité at St Hedwig Hospital in Berlin, Germany. Participants were outpatients aged 18-64 years who were diagnosed with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder and exclusion criteria included organic brain disorder, somatic illness affecting cerebral function, and current or past alcohol or illicit drug misuse requiring addiction-specific treatment. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 in blocks of ten to MPP-S (minimum 30 sessions) plus TAU or TAU alone. Outcome assessors were masked, but participants and therapists were not. The primary outcome was psychosocial functioning, measured using the Mini International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health Rating for Limitations of Activities and Participation in Psychological Disorders (Mini-ICF-APP) and evaluated at baseline and prespecified post-treatment (24 months) and follow-up (36 months) assessments. Analyses followed the intention-to-treat principle. Linear mixed models were used to analyse incomplete longitudinal data under a missing-at-random assumption. People with lived experience were not formally involved in the design, conduct, or reporting of this study. This trial was preregistered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02576613) and is complete. FINDINGS: From Oct 12, 2015, to Dec 7, 2021, 130 participants (57 [44%] female and 73 [56%] male) were randomly assigned to either MPP-S plus TAU (n=65) or TAU alone (n=64). One participant withdrew consent to data analysis. Regarding the primary outcome of psychosocial functioning, linear mixed models showed significant group-by-time interactions favouring the intervention: estimated marginal means indicated adjusted between-group differences in Mini-ICF-APP scores of -3·45 (95% CI -5·51 to -1·40; p=0·0011) at 24 months and -4·07 (-6·19 to -1·94; p=0·0002) at 36 months. The frequency of adverse events was similar between groups. There were three serious adverse events: two participants died by suicide (one in the MPP-S plus TAU group who did not start psychotherapy and one in the TAU alone group) and one participant in the MPP-S plus TAU group was admitted to a forensic hospital. INTERPRETATION: MPP-S added to TAU could improve psychosocial functioning compared with TAU alone. Our findings suggest efficacy and possible long-term benefits of psychodynamic psychotherapy for schizophrenia-spectrum disorders and indicate its potential role alongside other psychotherapeutic and psychosocial treatments. FUNDING: Berlin Institute of Health, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Psychoanalyse, Psychotherapie, Psychosomatik und Tiefenpsychologie, International Psychoanalytic University Berlin, and Köhler-Stiftung.

Humans↗
PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of mitapivat in adults with transfusion-dependent α-thalassaemia or β-thalassaemia (ENERGIZE-T): a double-blind, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: The absence of disease-modifying therapies for patients with α-thalassaemia and oral disease-modifying therapies for patients with β-thalassaemia has been a substantial unmet need in these patients. We assessed the efficacy and safety of mitapivat, an oral allosteric activator of pyruvate kinase, in adults with transfusion-dependent thalassaemia. METHODS: ENERGIZE-T is a global, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, conducted across 19 countries in North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, and the Middle East. Patients aged 18 years or older with transfusion-dependent α-thalassaemia or β-thalassaemia were randomly allocated (2:1) with a central interactive response technology system, stratified by geographical region and thalassaemia genotype, to receive 100 mg mitapivat or placebo orally twice a day for 48 weeks. The primary endpoint was transfusion reduction response (TRR), defined as a reduction of at least 50% in transfused red blood cell units with a reduction of at least two units in any consecutive 12-week period until week 48 compared with baseline. Efficacy was analysed in the full analysis set, comprising all randomly allocated patients. Type, severity, and relationship of adverse events and serious adverse events were assessed in patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04770779) and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between Nov 30, 2021 and May 2, 2023, 305 patients were screened, of whom 258 were randomly allocated (median age 33·5 years [IQR 27·0-44·0]; 136 [53%] female and 122 [47%] male participants). Of 258 patients allocated, 238 (92%) completed the double-blind treatment period. All patients were required to have a safety follow-up approximately 4 weeks after the final dose of study drug, regardless of completion of the double-blind period or continuation into the open-label extension period. In the full analysis set, TRRs occurred in 52 (30%) of 171 patients in the mitapivat group and 11 (13%) of 87 in the placebo group (adjusted difference 18 percentage points [95% CI 8-27]; two-sided p=0·0003). The safety analysis set comprised 172 patients in the mitapivat group (including one patient allocated to the placebo group who received one dose of mitapivat in error) and 85 in the placebo group. Adverse events were reported in 155 (90%) patients treated with mitapivat and 71 (84%) treated with placebo; the most common events with mitapivat were headache, upper respiratory tract infection, initial insomnia, diarrhoea, and fatigue. Serious adverse events were reported in 19 (11%) patients treated with mitapivat and 13 (15%) treated with placebo. Ten (6%) patients who received mitapivat and one (1%) who received placebo discontinued study treatment due to adverse events. No deaths were reported. INTERPRETATION: Mitapivat significantly reduced the transfusion burden and was generally well tolerated, showing a favourable benefit-risk profile. These findings support mitapivat as the first oral disease-modifying therapy for adults with transfusion-dependent α-thalassaemia or β-thalassaemia, providing a new treatment option to reduce transfusion burden in this patient population. FUNDING: Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Adult↗
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&#xb7;5 years (SD 12&#xb7;1), 57 (62%) were women, and 35 (38%) were men. At week 6, the observed MSL on the MWT was 2&#xb7;3 min (SD 2&#xb7;7) for placebo, 24&#xb7;0 min (8&#xb7;7) for alixorexton 4 mg, 25&#xb7;9 min (9&#xb7;4) for 6 mg, and 28&#xb7;2 min (11&#xb7;4) for 8 mg. Alixorexton improved MSL on the MWT, with a least-squares mean placebo-corrected change from baseline of 22&#xb7;2 min (95% CI 17&#xb7;2-27&#xb7;2) for alixorexton 4 mg, 24&#xb7;1 min (19&#xb7;0-29&#xb7;1) for 6 mg, and 26&#xb7;0 min (21&#xb7;0-31&#xb7;0) for 8 mg (adjusted p=0&#xb7;0099 for 4 mg, adjusted p<0&#xb7;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

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; I&#xb2; = 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; I&#xb2; = 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; I&#xb2; = 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; I&#xb2; = 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; I&#xb2; = 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; I&#xb2; = 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↗