SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “opioid-related adverse events”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

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

1,151 records · Page 3Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Opioid-sparing anesthesia based on opioid-free principles for early recovery after total knee arthroplasty: A randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether an opioid-sparing anesthesia strategy (OSA), based on opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), improves early postoperative recovery quality and optimizes functional outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA), compared with conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA). DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial with blinding of patients, surgeons, and outcome assessors. SETTING: Single center, July 2025 to February 2026. PATIENTS: 98 adult patients scheduled for elective unilateral TKA. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to the OSA or OBA group. The OSA regimen used esketamine and dexmedetomidine as the primary analgesic backbone, whereas the OBA regimen was opioid-based. Both groups received preoperative femoral nerve block and were administered oxycodone at skin incision and closure. Postoperatively, both groups received the same multimodal analgesia and patient-controlled analgesia. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score. Secondary outcomes included 48-h QoR-15; Oxford Knee Score (OKS) and EQ-5D-3L at 1 and 3 months; high pain at 1 month and chronic postsurgical pain at 3 months. Exploratory outcomes included postoperative C-reactive protein (CRP), and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), among others. RESULTS: At 24 h postoperatively, QoR-15 was higher in the OSA group than in the OBA group (118.4 ± 11.5 vs 113.3 ± 12.2; adjusted difference 5.12, 95% CI 0.51-9.74; P = 0.029), and this advantage persisted at 48 h (adjusted difference 5.54, 95% CI 1.57-9.52; P = 0.007). The OSA group had a lower incidence of PONV (P = 0.025) and lower postoperative CRP levels (P = 0.001). At 1 month, OKS was higher in the OSA group (adjusted difference 2.31, 95% CI 0.34-4.27; P = 0.022), with no significant differences in other secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: In TKA, this OFA-based OSA strategy improved early postoperative QoR-15 scores. However, the QoR-15 difference did not reach the minimal clinically important difference, so its clinical relevance remains uncertain.

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↗

PubMed2025

Preoperative Patient Education on Opioid Use and Pain After Surgery: A Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of preoperative analgesic education on postoperative opioid consumption, pain scores, and patient satisfaction with analgesia. BACKGROUND: Effective postoperative pain management is crucial for patient recovery and satisfaction, yet opioid use poses risks of tolerance and addiction. Preoperative patient education offers a potential avenue to mitigate opioid reliance and improve pain management outcomes. METHODS: This single-center randomized trial was conducted at the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus between October 2021 and October 2023. Adult patients scheduled for hip arthroplasty or laparoscopic-assisted abdominal surgery with an ASA physical status of 1 to 4 were eligible. Patients with a history of prolonged opioid use, planned regional block or epidural analgesia, or limited English fluency were excluded. Participants were randomized 1:1 to receive either an analgesic educational video or a generic video about surgery and hospitalization. The primary outcome was opioid consumption during the initial 72 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes included time-weighted average pain scores and patient satisfaction with analgesia. RESULTS: Among 957 analyzed patients, preoperative analgesic education did not significantly reduce opioid consumption (adjusted ratio of geometric means, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.86-1.18; P =0.890) or improve pain scores (adjusted mean difference, -0.1; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.2; P =0.617). Patient satisfaction scores also did not differ significantly between groups (adjusted mean difference, -0.1; 95% CI, -0.3 to 0.2; P = 0.611). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative analgesic education did not result in clinically meaningful reductions in opioid consumption or improvements in pain management outcomes. Further research may explore more intensive educational interventions to optimize postoperative pain management strategies.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of the Dual Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 and Glucagon Receptor Agonist Mazdutide in Predominantly Chinese Adults With Obesity and/or Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

AIM: To assess the effects of mazdutide on body weight, HbA1c, metabolic outcomes, and adverse events in adults with overweight/obesity and/or type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing mazdutide with placebo or active comparators in adults with overweight/obesity and/or T2D, identified through PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and ClinicalTrials.gov to 20 February 2026. Co-primary outcomes were percent change in body weight and change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes included other weight-related and metabolic outcomes, as well as safety. Random-effects models were used to generate pooled mean differences (MDs) or risk ratios with 95% confidence intervals, and the certainty of the evidence (COE) was assessed using GRADE. RESULTS: Nine RCTs (N = 2292; most with low risk of bias) were included. In overweight/obesity without diabetes, mazdutide 3, 4, and 6 mg reduced body weight more than placebo (MDs -6.56%, -9.92%, and -11.1%, respectively; very low COE due to substantial heterogeneity and few trials). In T2D, mazdutide 4 and 6 mg reduced body weight and HbA1c versus placebo (moderate COE) and also outperformed dulaglutide for both outcomes. Mazdutide also improved waist circumference, lipids, liver enzymes, and uric acid levels. Gastrointestinal adverse events were more frequent, but serious adverse events and treatment discontinuation rates were comparable with those of the comparators. CONCLUSIONS: Mazdutide was associated with dose-dependent reductions in body weight and HbA1c, with broader metabolic benefits in predominantly Chinese adults with obesity and/or T2D. Longer-term, multi-ethnic studies are needed to confirm durability, generalizability, and cardiovascular safety.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Dexamethasone as an adjuvant to continuous erector spinae plane block for postoperative analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery for pulmonary nodule surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: While dexamethasone is proven to enhance single-shot erector spinae plane block (ESPB), its role as an adjuvant in continuous ESPB catheters is unclear. This randomised controlled trial evaluated whether adding dexamethasone to ropivacaine improves analgesia after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). METHODS: 85 patients undergoing VATS with continuous ESPB were randomised to receive postoperative infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine(C-ESPB group) or ropivacaine with 10 mg dexamethasone(D + C-ESPB group). The primary outcome was resting pain visual analog scale (VAS)at 12 h postoperatively, while secondary outcomes included QoR-15 scores, tramadol consumption, time to first analgesic requirement, postoperative adverse events, 3-month incidence of chronic pain, catheter-related complications, pain intensity at other times, and hospital stay. RESULTS: The D + C-ESPB group had significantly lower resting pain at 12 h [2.56 (1.03) vs 3.24 (1.21), mean difference -0.680, p = 0.006]; and lower coughing pain at 12 h [4.60 (1.48) vs 5.69 (1.35), mean difference 1.086, p < 0.001], with analgesic superiority sustained through 72 h. Quality of Recovery-15 scores were higher at 12 h [124.70 (12.48) vs 117.26 (12.24); mean difference -7.436, p = 0.007] and 48 h [141.60 (5.51) vs 138.98 (6.64); mean difference -2.628, p = 0.050]; Total tramadol consumption over 72 h was markedly reduce [0 (0,100) vs 100 (75,100), z = -3.807, p < 0.001], and hospital stay was shorter [Mean (SD) 6.09 (1.34) d vs 6.93 (1.55)d, p < 0.001]. The intervention did not, however, alter the 3-month incidence of chronic postsurgical pain (31% vs 34%, p = 0.756). CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone significantly enhances the analgesic efficacy of continuous ESPB, improving early pain control, recovery quality, and opioid-sparing after VATS, but does not reduce the incidence of chronic persistent surgical pain.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Intravenous lidocaine reduces the propofol EC50 for loss of consciousness and intraoperative anesthetic consumption in gynecological laparoscopy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous lidocaine reduces propofol requirements and procedure-related adverse events. OBJECTIVES: The study aimed to test whether intravenous lidocaine would reduce the effect-site concentration of propofol required to achieve loss of consciousness and decrease propofol consumption during total intravenous anesthesia in gynecological laparoscopy. METHODS: This was a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to receive either intravenous lidocaine (1.5 mg·kg-¹ bolus) followed by continuous infusion or an equal volume of saline. Propofol was administered via target-controlled infusion starting at an effect-site concentration of 3.5 μg/mL. The concentration was then adjusted in steps of 0.5 μg/mLaccording to Dixon's up-and-down sequential method: decreased if loss of consciousness was achieved, or increased if not. Loss of consciousness was defined as loss of response to verbal commands. The median effective concentration (EC50) of propofol for inducing loss of consciousness was calculated using the Dixon's up-and-down method. General anesthesia was maintained with propofol and remifentanil, guided by state entropy (target 40-60) and surgical pleth index (target 20-50). Drug consumption was normalized to anesthesia duration and body weight. RESULTS: The estimated EC50 of propofol for inducing loss of consciousness was significantly lower in the lidocaine group than in the saline group (3.32 μg/mL, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 3.04-3.59 vs. 3.89 μg/mL, 95% CI: 3.50-4.28). Under the study protocol, the lidocaine group also required less propofol (8.62 mg·kg-1·h-1, 95% CI: 8.10-9.15 vs. 9.89 mg·kg-1·h-1, 95% CI: 9.05-10.73) and less remifentanil (0.23 μg·kg-1·min-1, 95% CI: 0.21-0.24 vs. 0.27 μg·kg-1·min-1, 95% CI: 0.24-0.30) compared with the saline group. CONCLUSION: Intravenous lidocaine reduced the propofol EC50 for Loss of Consciousness (LOC) and decreased intraoperative propofol and remifentanil consumptions in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy. These findings suggest a propofol- and opioid-sparing effect of intravenous lidocaine in this setting, although confirmation in larger multicenter trials is needed.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Risk of adverse events in elotuzumab-treated patients with multiple myeloma: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Elotuzumab, an anti-SLAMF7 monoclonal antibody for multiple myeloma (MM), lacks a comprehensive safety profile from meta-analysis. METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE and CENTRAL through February 13, 2025 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating elotuzumab in MM. Pooled relative risks(RRs) of adverse events observed in elotuzumab-containing regimens versus control therapies. RESULTS: 6 RCTs (N=1,736) were included. Elotuzumabsignificantly reduced incidence of neutropenia (RR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.76-0.98), but increased risks of cough (RR = 1.41, 95% CI: 0.96-2.09), pneumonia (RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.07-1.59), diarrhea (RR = 1.16, 95% CI: 1.05-1.30), pyrexia (RR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.10-1.96) and infections (RR = 1.09, 95% CI: 1.03-1.15). No significant differences were observed for anemia, thrombocytopenia, respiratory infections, nausea, appetite loss, back pain, muscle spasms, peripheral edema, insomnia, rash, pruritus, fatigue, or hypokalemia. For grade 3-4 events, elotuzumab was associated with higher risks of lymphopenia (RR = 1.86, 95% CI: 1.31-2.64, p = 0.0005, I2 = 9%), diarrhea (RR = 1.47, 95% CI: 1.00-2.17), pneumonia (RR = 1.57, 95% CI: 1.11-2.23), cataracts (RR = 2.87, 95% CI: 1.15-7.21) and infections (RR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.04-1.62). CONCLUSION: Elotuzumab in MM appears safe but with a specific adverse events pattern : lower neutropenia, but higher respiratory, gastrointestinal, metabolic, and infectious events. Differences may be influenced by longer treatment and corticosteroid use; therefore, interpretation of outcomes such as hyperglycemia and cataracts requires particular caution.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Thymosin-ɑ1 for people with chronic hepatitis B.

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

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Adductor Canal Block and Local Anesthetic Versus Local Anesthetic Alone in ACL Reconstruction: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Effective postoperative analgesia is crucial for early recovery after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). Local infiltration analgesia (LIA) and adductor canal block (ACB) are common regional techniques, but their combined efficacy remains unclear. PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness of LIA alone versus LIA combined with ACB in patients undergoing ACLR, with primary outcomes including postoperative opioid consumption and quadriceps function. STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. METHODS: A double-blind randomized controlled trial enrolled 100 patients undergoing ACLR under general anesthesia. Patients were randomized into 2 groups: LIA + sham (saline injection) (n = 50) and LIA + ACB (n = 50). The primary outcome was postoperative opioid consumption in the first 24 hours. Secondary outcomes included visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, quadriceps function assessed by straight leg raise (SLR) at 3 hours, Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score, and Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) at 1 week. Statistical analysis was performed using t tests and chi-square tests with a P value <.05 considered significant. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in 24-hour opioid consumption between the LIA + ACB and LIA-only groups (P = .109). Similarly, VAS pain scores at 24 hours postoperatively showed no significant differences between the groups (P = .0804). Early functional recovery, assessed by SLR performance at 3 hours, was equivalent between groups (P = .6711). Additionally, QoR-15 scores on postoperative day 1 and KOOS values at 1 week demonstrated no significant differences (P = .6486 and P = .9054, respectively). Intraoperative opioid consumption was not different between the groups (P = .127). CONCLUSION: These findings indicate that the addition of ACB to LIA does not yield postoperative analgesic in ACLR. Consequently, LIA alone suffices for routine ACLR, potentially enabling clinicians to optimize perioperative workflows without incurring the additional time, financial burden, and resources associated with routine ACB administration. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT04721119.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Low-Dose Perineural Dexamethasone Enhances Analgesia After Pediatric Hand Surgery Without Elevating Systemic Stress Markers: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Supraclavicular brachial plexus block is a widely used technique for upper limb surgery in children. Although perineural dexamethasone has demonstrated efficacy in prolonging analgesia in adults, data on its optimal dosing and systemic safety in pediatric patients are limited. This study aimed to evaluate whether low-dose perineural dexamethasone can prolong postoperative analgesia without increasing systemic stress markers in young children undergoing hand or wrist surgery. METHODS: In this triple-blinded, randomized controlled trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT06086392), 90 children aged 3 months to 6 years undergoing elective upper extremity surgery were assigned to receive supraclavicular brachial plexus block with 0.2% ropivacaine combined with either normal saline (control), dexamethasone 0.05 mg/kg, or dexamethasone 0.1 mg/kg. The primary outcome was time from arrival in the postanesthesia care unit to first administration of rescue opioid analgesia. Secondary outcomes included total opioid consumption, postoperative pain intensity using the FLACC scale, blood glucose levels, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio, and time to motor recovery. RESULTS: Both dexamethasone groups demonstrated significantly prolonged time to first opioid use compared with the control group (mean±SD: 19.4±2.2 h in the 0.1 mg/kg group, 16.0±1.9 h in the 0.05 mg/kg group, and 8.5±1.3 h in controls; P <0.0001). Total opioid consumption was significantly reduced in the dexamethasone groups. Postoperative pain scores were lower in both intervention groups, especially during the first 12 hours. No significant differences were found among groups in blood glucose, inflammatory markers, or incidence of nerve deficits. Motor recovery was delayed in the dexamethasone groups but did not interfere with early mobilization. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose perineural dexamethasone (0.05 to 0.1 mg/kg) safely and effectively prolongs postoperative analgesia and reduces opioid needs in children undergoing upper limb surgery, without causing systemic metabolic or inflammatory disturbances. The 0.05 mg/kg dose may offer a more favorable balance between analgesic efficacy and motor recovery time. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level I-randomized controlled trial.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Effects of erector spinae plane block on postoperative pain in patients undergoing implant-based breast reconstruction for breast cancer: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Implant-based breast reconstruction after mastectomy causes acute pain. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a single-shot T5 erector spinae plane block (ESPB) reduces postoperative pain. DESIGN: Single-center, RCT with allocation concealment; blinded assessors and statisticians. SETTING: Tertiary cancer center in China. PATIENTS: 100 adults scheduled for radical mastectomy with implant reconstruction were randomized (1:1); follow-up complete. INTERVENTION: Before induction, ESPB was given under ultrasound guidance at T5 with 30 mL of 0.375% ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg; controls received no block. Standardized general anesthesia and postoperative PCA for both groups. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Resting NRS at 6 h (MCID=1). Secondary outcomes were opioid consumption, quality of recovery, and PONV. RESULTS: ESPB did not significantly reduce resting pain at 6 h at the median (τ =0.50; adjusted difference -0.9; p = 0.08). At the upper tail, pain intensity was lower (τ = 0.75; -1.8; p <0.01). Repeated measures provided additional time-point information, improving estimation precision and test sensitivity. ESPB get lower pain scores at 6, 12, and 24 hours (all p <0.01). But, the 95% CI includes the MCID, the clinical benefit remains uncertain. Opioid use decreased at 24 h (-13.5 mg; p <0.01) and 48 h (-6.6 mg; p <0.01). Quality of recovery improved at 24 h (difference 5 points; p <0.01), but not later. No differences were observed in intraoperative hemodynamics or PONV. CONCLUSIONS: Single-shot T5 ESPB with perineural dexmedetomidine may reduce postoperative pain and opioid requirements and improve early recovery. Further large trials are warranted. Clinical relevance remains to be confirmed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06143020.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A polygenic risk score for peripheral artery disease and major adverse limb events.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Large-scale genome-wide association studies have identified common genetic variants that predict the risk of peripheral artery disease (PAD). This study assessed whether a polygenic risk score (PRS) is associated with PAD and the incidence of major adverse limb events (MALE) independent of clinical risk factors in patients with established cardiometabolic disease. METHODS: A genetic analysis was performed, pooling individual patient-level data from six TIMI trials. The association of a recently validated PAD PRS with prevalent PAD and the incidence of MALE (acute limb ischaemia, chronic limb-threatening ischaemia, major amputation, or peripheral revascularization) was assessed. RESULTS: A total of 68 816 patients were included in this analysis, with a median follow-up of 2.6 years. Of these, 5986 (8.7%) had known PAD at baseline. After adjusting for clinical risk factors, a higher PAD PRS was independently associated with a 15% greater odds of prevalent PAD (adjusted odds ratio per 1-SD: 1.15 [95% confidence interval 1.12-1.18], P < .0001), a magnitude of risk as strong as established clinical risk factors. A total of 577 patients experienced MALE during follow-up. A higher PAD PRS was associated with a 30% increased risk of MALE (adjusted hazard ratio per 1-SD: 1.30 [1.19-1.42], P < .0001). Adding the PAD PRS to clinical risk factors resulted in a statistically significant but modest improvement in discrimination (area under the curve went from 0.651 to 0.662 P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In a broad spectrum of patients with cardiometabolic disease, the PAD PRS is associated with an increased risk of PAD and the incidence of MALE beyond clinical risk factors; however, the improvement in discrimination was statistically significant but clinically modest.

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↗

PubMed2026

Machine learning-ready genomic biomarkers: ATF3 polymorphisms predict postoperative analgesic demand through AI-compatible phenotyping.

PURPOSE: To determine whether ATF3 polymorphisms can serve as genetic biomarkers for machine learning-based precision analgesia by establishing a genotype-phenotype association suitable for predictive modeling of postoperative opioid requirements. METHODS: In a prospective cohort of 167 adults undergoing abdominal surgery, ATF3 SNPs rs3122721 and rs3125293 were genotyped. A structured dataset architecture was developed to represent genetic profiles as input features for supervised learning models, enabling translational analysis of genotype‑dependent opioid consumption over 72 h. RESULTS: Patients with homozygous genotypes of the ATF3 SNPs had significantly higher opioid requirements than non‑carriers, despite reporting similar subjective pain scores. This consistent genotype‑dependent pattern provided a clinically relevant phenotype suitable for integration into predictive algorithms. CONCLUSION: ATF3 genotyping offers a promising biomarker for computationally informed precision analgesia. By linking genomic variability to clinically meaningful outcomes within a structured clinical and genomic framework, this approach supports the future development of risk-stratified clinical decision-support systems to optimize postoperative pain management.Trial registration ChiCTR1900021991, registered 30 April 2019. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at https://doi.org/10.1007/s13755-026-00480-9.

ATF3↗

PubMed2026

Letter to the Editor regarding: "Attainment of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Goals and Statin Use in Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease in Australian General Practice: Are We Doing Enough?".

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Adverse events↗

PubMed2026

Ifebemtinib plus garsorasib in previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer with KRASG12C mutation: a multicentre, randomised, phase 1b/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ifebemtinib is a potent oral focal adhesion kinase inhibitor. Preclinical evidence supports combining ifebemtinib with the KRASG12C inhibitor garsorasib. This study aimed to evaluate this combination in KRASG12C-mutated solid tumours. METHODS: This multicentre, phase 1b/2 study had a phase 1b component to establish the recommended phase 2 dose and a phase 2 multitumour expansion component. In phase 1b, the safety and tolerability of ifebemtinib combined with garsorasib was assessed using a 3 + 3 design in KRASG12C-mutated solid tumours. No dose-limiting toxic effects were observed, and the recommended phase 2 dose was established as ifebemtinib 100 mg orally once daily plus garsorasib 600 mg orally twice daily. Here, we report the results of the cohort of previously treated KRASG12C-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer from phase 2 expansion. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years) who had histologically confirmed locally advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer harbouring the KRASG12C mutation, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance-status score of 0 or 1, and had disease progression after previous irinotecan-based or oxaliplatin-based combination therapy, were recruited from seven of nine participating tertiary hospitals in China. On the basis of the recommended phase 2 dose, phase 2 comprised a single-arm study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ifebemtinib combined with garsorasib and an open-label, randomised study in which patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive ifebemtinib plus garsorasib or garsorasib alone, by use of centralised computer-generated block randomisation with no stratification. Investigators were masked to the block size. The primary efficacy endpoint of phase 2 was investigator-assessed objective response rate (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1), assessed in the safety analysis set in the single-arm study and in all randomly assigned patients (intention-to-treat population) in the randomised study. At least six objective responses (safety analysis set) were required in the single-arm study to proceed to the randomised study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06166836 and NCT05379946, and is active but not recruiting. FINDINGS: Between April 7, 2023 and Dec 13, 2024, 51 patients were enrolled in phase 2 (15 in the single-arm study and 36 in the randomised study). In the single-arm study, the median age was 53 years (IQR 39 to 63), nine (60%) patients were female, six (40%) were male, and all were Asian. In the randomised study, the median age was 51 years (IQR 42 to 59) in the combination group and 63 years (IQR 54 to 66) in the monotherapy group, 24 (67%) were female, 12 (33%) were male, and all patients were Asian. In the single-arm part, the confirmed objective response rate was 46·7% (95% CI 21·3 to 73·4). Seven patients had partial responses, triggering progression to the randomised study. In the randomised study, the confirmed objective response rate was 38·9% (95% CI 17·3 to 64·3) with the combination therapy versus 16·7% (95% CI 3·6 to 41·4) with garsorasib alone (between-group difference 22·2%, 95% CI -7·7 to 49·1; one-sided p=0·068). In the single-arm study, grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in four (27%) of 15 patients, and in the randomised study, grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in six (33%) of 18 patients in the combination group and five (28%) of 18 in the garsorasib group. Grade 3 treatment-related adverse events occurring in at least two patients were diarrhoea (six [18%]), proteinuria (two [6%]), and intestinal obstruction (two [6%]) in patients treated with combination therapy (combined), and increased alanine aminotransferase and γ-glutamyltransferase (two [11%] each) in patients treated with garsorasib alone. Serious adverse events occurred in ten (30%) patients in the combination group and in four (22%) patients in the monotherapy group. One patient in the garsorasib monotherapy group died due to the underlying malignancy within 30 days after completing study treatment, which was reported as a serious adverse event. The death was assessed by the investigators as not related to garsorasib. No grade 4 treatment-related adverse events or treatment-related deaths were reported across all cohorts. INTERPRETATION: The combination of ifebemtinib and garsorasib showed promising anticancer activity and manageable safety profile in previously treated patients with KRASG12C-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer. Although the improvement in response rate did not reach statistical significance in the randomised study, these findings support further evaluation of ifebemtinib plus garsorasib in this population. FUNDING: InxMed, InventisBio, National Natural Science Foundation of China, the Jian Bing Ling Yan + X Research and Development Program of Zhejiang Province, and the Zhejiang Province Medical and Health Science and Technology Plan Project.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ketamine Plus Midazolam versus Fentanyl Plus Midazolam for Sedation and Analgesia during Image-guided Procedures in Interventional Radiology: Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background Opioid-benzodiazepine regimens remain common for radiologist-administered procedural sedation despite respiratory and analgesic effectiveness concerns. Purpose To compare intraprocedural pain and patient-reported experience between ketamine/midazolam and fentanyl/midazolam during image-guided procedural sedation. Materials and Methods This randomized clinical trial was conducted at a single academic center between June 2025 and February 2026. Adults undergoing image-guided lung or bone biopsy or abscess drainage were randomized to fentanyl/midazolam or ketamine/midazolam administered by interventional radiologists. Procedures were performed using US, CT, CT fluoroscopy, or combined CT and US guidance. The primary outcome was maximum intraprocedural pain (0-10 on the Numeric Rating Scale). Secondary outcomes included sedation depth, physiologic parameters, oxygen desaturation, patient-reported experience assessed using a modified Heidelberg questionnaire, and complications. Results Among 264 randomized procedures (132 procedures per group) in 260 participants (median age, 68 years [IQR, 61-75 years]; 135 [52%] female), ketamine/midazolam resulted in lower maximum intraprocedural pain than fentanyl/midazolam (mean difference, -1.4 points [95% CI: -2.0, -0.8]; P < .001). Pain scores greater than 4 occurred less frequently with ketamine/midazolam (2.3% vs 17%; absolute difference, 14 percentage points [95% CI: 8, 21]; P < .001). Ketamine/midazolam was associated with higher nadir oxygen saturation (mean difference, +1.4% [95% CI: 0.6, 2.2]; P = .001) and fewer oxygen desaturation events below 90% (three [2.3%] vs 13 [9.8%]; absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points [95% CI: 1.9, 13.3]; P = .02). Ketamine/midazolam produced deeper sedation and higher intraprocedural systolic blood pressure. Hallucinations occurred more frequently with ketamine/midazolam (15 [11.4%] vs five [3.8%]; absolute difference, 7.6 percentage points [95% CI: 1.3, 13.9]; P = .03), though overall procedural comfort, reduced recall, and perceived adequacy of sedation were improved. Procedure-related and sedation-related complications did not differ between groups. Conclusion Radiologist-administered ketamine/midazolam during image-guided procedural sedation improved analgesia and patient-reported experience with fewer hypoxemic events and no increase in complications compared with fentanyl/midazolam. Clinical trial registration no. NCT07040163

Aged↗

PubMed2026

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

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

Humans↗