SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Intubation, Gastrointestinal”

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.

103 records · Page 6Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Semaglutide 2.0 mg as an Add-On to Dose-Reduced Insulin Glargine versus Dose-Titrated Insulin Glargine in People With Type 2 Diabetes and Overweight (SUSTAIN OPTIMIZE).

AIMS: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) management with basal insulin can lead to hypoglycaemia and weight gain. SUSTAIN OPTIMIZE compared once-weekly semaglutide 2.0 mg as add-on to dose-reduced insulin glargine (Sema+IGlarreduced) versus dose-titrated IGlar (IGlartitrated) on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight (BW), daily insulin dose, and participant satisfaction. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SUSTAIN OPTIMIZE was a 40-week, phase 3b, open-label, randomised study. Adults with T2D, overweight (body mass index ≥ 25 kg/m2), and treatment with basal insulin ≤ 40 units/day were randomised 1:1 into Sema+IGlarreduced or IGlartitrated. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c using a non-inferiority approach. Secondary endpoints assessed superiority of Sema+IGlarreduced versus IGlartitrated in reducing HbA1c, BW, daily insulin dose, and improving Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change version (DTSQc) scores. RESULTS: Overall, 573 participants were randomised. Sema+IGlarreduced achieved both non-inferiority and superiority versus IGlartitrated in HbA1c reduction (estimated treatment difference [ETD]: -0.74%; 95% confidence interval [CI95]: -0.90, -0.59) and superiority in BW change (ETD: -8.5 kg; CI95: -9.5, -7.4), relative daily insulin dose change (ETD: -121.9%; CI95: -143.1, -100.6), and DTSQc scores (ETD: 2.6; CI95: 1.6, 3.5) (p < 0.0001 for all endpoints). No new safety concerns were identified. Severe hypoglycaemia was reduced (rate ratio: 0.45; CI95: 0.23, 0.87; p = 0.02), while gastrointestinal events were higher for Sema+IGlarreduced (310 vs. 32 events). CONCLUSIONS: Once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.0 mg as add-on to dose-reduced IGlar achieved superior reductions in HbA1c, BW, and daily insulin dose in people with T2D and overweight, while reducing their risk for severe hypoglycaemia compared to dose-titrated IGlar alone.

Adult↗

PubMed2026

A two-center randomized clinical superiority trial of single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy for severe obesity: SASSY study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass is a novel metabolic bariatric surgery intended to enhance metabolic outcomes and reduce the risk of postoperative complications. Although preliminary outcome data for single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass are promising, evidence from adequately powered, randomized head-to-head comparisons is scarce. This trial compares the efficacy and safety of single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy in patients with class II obesity (body mass index = 35.0-39.9 kg/m²) with at least one obesity‑related comorbidity or class III obesity (body mass index ⩾40.0 kg/m²). METHODS: This two-center randomized clinical superiority trial enrolls patients eligible for metabolic bariatric surgery at two specialized Norwegian centers. Included patients are randomly assigned (1:1) to either single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass or sleeve gastrectomy with standardized perioperative treatment and care. The primary endpoint is the between-group difference in change in body mass index from baseline to 2 years after single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass versus sleeve gastrectomy. Secondary endpoints include additional weight loss outcomes, the prevalence of gastroesophageal reflux disease, surgical and postoperative complications, obesity-related comorbidities, nutritional status, bone mineral density, gastrointestinal symptoms, quality of life, and rates of revisional and conversion surgery. All endpoints will be evaluated at 2 and 5 years after surgery. Statistical analyses utilize linear mixed models and analysis of covariance within an intention-to-treat framework. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide high-level evidence with robust and comparative outcome data on single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, aiming to clarify the clinical utility of single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass and inform surgical practice. Findings will address gaps in medium- and long-term evidence regarding weight loss, safety, comorbidity resolution, and quality of life following single-anastomosis sleeve ileal bypass.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Assessment of the safety and efficacy of sodium pentaborate pentahydrate in individuals with overweight and obesity: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 dose-finding trial.

The present study aimed to examine the short-term safety and tolerability of sodium pentaborate pentahydrate (NaB) and to explore preliminary efficacy and dose selection as secondary objectives in individuals with overweight or obesity. In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 1/2 trial, conducted from July 2024 to January 2025, 177 adults with overweight or obesity were randomized, of whom 116 completed the 12-week trial. Participants received placebo or NaB at doses of 200, 400, 600, 800, or 1,000 mg for 12 weeks, alongside a standardized diet and exercise programme. The primary safety objective was to investigate short-term safety and tolerability through adverse events, hypoglycaemic episodes, gastrointestinal adverse events, and changes in haematological and biochemical parameters. The primary exploratory efficacy outcome was percentage change in body weight from baseline to week 12. Secondary and exploratory efficacy outcomes included body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist and hip circumferences, waist-to-hip ratio, glycaemic markers, lipid parameters, and blood pressure. Baseline characteristics were broadly similar across groups (all p ≥ 0.05), and no major short-term safety signal was observed. Mean body weight decreased in the 400 mg (-2.6 kg), 600 mg (-1.2 kg), and 1,000 mg groups (-3.1 kg). Compared with placebo, the 1,000 mg dose resulted in the largest reductions in body weight (mean difference, -2.30 kg; p = 0.01) and BMI (mean difference, -0.85 kg/m2; p = 0.02). The 1,000 mg dose showed preliminary efficacy for reducing body weight and BMI over 12 weeks compared with placebo, with no major short-term safety signal and no clinically meaningful changes in renal, hepatic, or haematological markers. All reported adverse events were mild. These short-term findings are exploratory and require confirmation in future phase 3 trials with extended follow-up to investigate long-term safety and efficacy.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Impact of PerioperAtive LidocAine Infusions on Enhanced Recovery After Noncardiac Surgery (IMPALA-ERAS) in an inpatient setting: rationale, design and protocol for a sequential, repeated crossover trial.

INTRODUCTION: Multimodal analgesic strategies designed to minimise perioperative opioid exposure are fundamental components of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. Despite widespread implementation of ERAS protocols, the optimal analgesic regimen remains undefined, as the individual contributions of specific agents to overall analgesic efficacy and opioid-sparing effects are not fully elucidated. Intravenous lidocaine, a widely utilised local anaesthetic, possesses both analgesic and anti-inflammatory properties and has been associated with improved gastrointestinal recovery. This study seeks to pragmatically evaluate the impact of incorporating perioperative intravenous lidocaine infusion into established ERAS pathways on postoperative functional recovery. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Impact of PerioperAtive LidocAine Infusions (IMPALA) on ERAS trial is a single-centre, pragmatic, cluster-randomised, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. A total of 2290 patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery, emergency general surgery, urology, ventral hernia repair, surgical oncology or spine surgery will be randomly assigned to receive either intraoperative and postoperative intravenous lidocaine infusions (administered for up to 48 hours) or placebo as part of a standardised multimodal analgesic regimen integrated into established ERAS pathways. The primary outcome is case mix index-adjusted resource length of stay, defined as the time interval from surgical initiation to hospital discharge adjusted for case mix index. The primary outcome is total inpatient opioid consumption within the first 72 hours, reported in oral morphine milligram equivalents. Secondary outcomes include various in-hospital clinical endpoints derived from the electronic health record. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This protocol and accompanying statistical analysis plan outline the study design, primary and secondary endpoints and analytic methodology. The IMPALA-ERAS trial has received ethical approval from the Vanderbilt University Institutional Review Board (IRB: 250617). The findings will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national conferences. Results from this trial are expected to inform evidence-based practices regarding perioperative lidocaine infusion and its potential contributions to enhanced postoperative recovery in surgical patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT07224711.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Randomized controlled trial comparing 7-day fexuprazan-based and 14-day rabeprazole-based triple therapies for Helicobacter pylori eradication.

BACKGROUND: Fexuprazan is a newly developed potassium-competitive acid blocker used for the treatment of acid-related gastrointestinal diseases; however, clinical data regarding its efficacy in Helicobacter pylori eradication are lacking. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of a 7-day fexuprazan-based triple therapy regimen compared with a 14-day rabeprazole-based triple therapy regimen for H. pylori infection in Korean patients. METHODS: A randomized controlled single-center study was conducted to compare the eradication rates between 7-day fexuprazan (40 mg)-based triple therapy (with 1 g amoxicillin and clarithromycin 500 mg administered twice daily) and 14-day rabeprazole (20 mg)-based triple therapy for H. pylori eradication. The primary endpoint was the success rate of H. pylori eradication, determined using the 13C-urea breath test. Safety outcomes were also evaluated. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were randomly assigned to the fexuprazan and rabeprazole groups. In the full analysis set, eradication rates were 80.00% (32/40) in the fexuprazan group and 82.05% (32/39) in the rabeprazole group. In the per-protocol set, eradication rates were 83.78% (31/37) and 88.89% (32/36), respectively (P = 1.000 and P =.737). The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 70.00% (28/40) in the fexuprazan group and 66.67% (26/39) in the rabeprazole group, with no significant difference between groups (P =.812); both regimens were well tolerated. Among patients with clarithromycin-susceptible strains in full analysis set, eradication rates were 93.10% (27/29) in the fexuprazan group and 87.09% (27/31) in the rabeprazole group (P =.672). In the per-protocol set, eradication rates for susceptible strains were 96.42% (27/28) in the fexuprazan group and 93.10% (27/29) in the rabeprazole group (P = 1.000). CONCLUSION: Seven-day fexuprazan-based triple therapy demonstrated eradication efficacy comparable with that of 14-day rabeprazole-based therapy in treatment-naïve Korean patients with H. pylori infection. The fexuprazan-based regimen showed a similar safety profile and comparable incidence of adverse events with that of the rabeprazole-based regimen.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Efficacy and safety of Janus kinase inhibitors in Behçet's disease: A systematic literature review.

INTRODUCTION: Behçet's disease e (BD) is a chronic, relapsing, multisystem inflammatory disorder that if not successfully treated can lead to severe, organ or life-threatening complications. Despite treatment with glucocorticoids, immunosuppressants, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF) inhibitors, some patients still have refractory disease that mandates additional therapeutic options. The pathogenesis of BD involves dysregulated innate and adaptive immune responses with multiple cytokines signaling through the Janus kinase (JAK)-signal transducer and activator of transcription (STAT) pathway. By targeting multiple inflammatory pathways, JAK inhibitors have emerged as a promising therapeutic option. However, current evidence remains limited and heterogeneous. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review to evaluate their efficacy and safety in BD. METHODS: We conducted a systematic literature review in accordance with PRISMA 2020 guidelines (PROSPERO registration: CRD420261381955). PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Web of Science were searched from inception to March 2026. Original clinical studies evaluating Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors in BD were included. Two reviewers independently performed study selection, data extraction, and quality assessment using Joanna Briggs Institute tools. Due to heterogeneity, results were synthesized narratively, focusing on efficacy and safety outcomes. RESULTS: Seventeen studies (99 patients) were included, predominantly case reports and small observational cohorts with overall high methodological quality. All evaluated tofacitinib, baricitinib, or upadacitinib, with no data on other JAK inhibitors. Patients were highly treatment-refractory, with prior failure of conventional and biologic therapies. Upadacitinib was the most frequently studied agent and demonstrated an overall response rate of 85.2% and complete remission in 59.3% in a multi-center study. Efficacy was observed across multiple domains, with the most consistent responses in intestinal disease, including clinical and endoscopic remission, alongside frequent glucocorticoid-sparing effects. Safety findings were consistent with known JAK inhibitor safety profiles, with mainly mild to moderate infections and manageable laboratory abnormalities, and no clear signal for increased thrombotic events, although follow-up was limited. CONCLUSION: JAK inhibitors demonstrate promising efficacy in BD, particularly in refractory and multisystem disease. The most consistent evidence of efficacy was observed in gastrointestinal involvement, whereas data for other disease domains remain limited. Their safety profile appears consistent with existing data, although further follow up and validation is required. High-quality randomized controlled studies are an imminent need to study the potential role of JAK inhibitors in BD.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Weight regain following discontinuation of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in adults who are overweight or obese: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) on weight changes and the occurrence of adverse reactions in overweight or obese adults after drug withdrawal. METHODS: Computerized searches were conducted in evidence-based databases such as PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Scopus. The search period was from the establishment of the database to December 2025. Collect randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials on GLP-1RAs, including tirzepatide, semaglutide, liraglutide, and dulaglutide, for the treatment of overweight or obese adult patients. The risk of bias in the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias V2.0 tool provided by the Cochrane Collaboration, and meta-analysis was performed using the R programming language. RESULTS: A total of 699 studies were initially retrieved. Eventually, six studies involving 8,993 patients were included in the quantitative analysis, comprising 5,553 patients in the discontinuation group and 3,440 in the continued treatment group. The results of the meta-analysis showed that, compared with the continued treatment group, the weight difference in the discontinuation group was mean difference (MD) = 17.90%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [14.11-21.69], P < 0.0001. It can be seen that there was a significant rebound in weight after drug withdrawal, and there was statistical heterogeneity among the studies (P = 0.0082). Subgroup analysis further revealed that the weight rebound amplitude after discontinuation of tirzepatide was significantly higher than that of semaglutide. This result suggests that the differences in the mechanism of action of different GLP-1RAs may be the reason for the differences in weight changes after discontinuation. In addition, the percentage difference in body weight between after and before drug withdrawal was MD = 9.11%, 95% CI [7.91-10.30], P < 0.0001, further verifying the trend of weight rebound after drug withdrawal. The summary of adverse reaction reports analyzed and studied indicates that after drug withdrawal, the overall adverse reactions of patients decreased, gastrointestinal adverse reactions decreased, and the incidence of cardiovascular events was not affected by drug withdrawal. CONCLUSION: There is a significant weight rebound phenomenon after discontinuation of GLP-1RAs, and the rebound magnitudes vary among different types of drugs. At the same time, there is a risk of adverse reactions during the use of such drugs.

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

Once-weekly IcoSema versus once-daily insulin glargine U100 in type 2 diabetes management (COMBINE 4): an open-label, multicentre, treat-to-target, randomised, phase 3b trial.

BACKGROUND: Stepwise treatment intensification is recommended for managing type 2 diabetes, including insulin initiation when non-insulin glucose-lowering medications are insufficient. Guidelines recommend combining a GLP-1 receptor agonist with basal insulin to improve glycaemic efficacy while reducing weight gain and hypoglycaemia risk. COMBINE 4 evaluated the efficacy and safety of IcoSema, a once-weekly combination therapy of basal insulin icodec and semaglutide (a GLP-1-receptor agonist) versus insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) in people with type 2 diabetes on oral glucose-lowering medications. METHODS: COMBINE 4 was a 40-week, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target, phase 3b trial conducted across 97 sites in nine countries. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c ≥8·0%) receiving oral glucose-lowering medications were randomly allocated in a 1:1 ratio without stratification to IcoSema or once-daily glargine U100. The titration target was 3·9-5·0 mmol/L (70-90 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c and the secondary confirmatory endpoint was change in bodyweight, both from baseline to week 40, evaluated in all randomly allocated participants. Adverse events were recorded during weeks 0-45. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06269107) and is complete. FINDINGS: Of 653 individuals screened between Feb 15 and Aug 6, 2024, 151 did not meet screening criteria and 17 withdrew before initiating treatment; 243 were randomised to IcoSema and 242 to glargine U100. Of the 485 randomly allocated participants, 286 (59%) were male and 199 (41%) were female, and median age was 58 years (range 26-82). For HbA1c, from baseline (9·57% for IcoSema and 9·50% for glargine U100), mean change to week 40 was greater with IcoSema versus glargine U100 (-3·32 vs -2·44 percentage points; estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·88 percentage points [95% CI -1·12 to -0·63]), confirming superiority of IcoSema (p<0·001). From baseline to week 40, mean bodyweight decreased with IcoSema and increased with glargine U100 (-0·79 vs 3·81 kg; ETD -4·61 kg [95% CI -5·46 to -3·75]), confirming superiority of IcoSema (p<0·001). Rate of combined clinically significant (blood glucose <3·0 mmol/L [<54 mg/dL], confirmed with a blood glucose meter) or severe hypoglycaemia (severe cognitive impairment requiring external assistance for recovery) was statistically significantly lower with IcoSema versus glargine U100 (0·29 vs 0·59 episodes per person-year of exposure; estimated rate ratio 0·56 [95% CI 0·32 to 0·97]; p=0·04). Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported adverse events with IcoSema. INTERPRETATION: Once-weekly IcoSema demonstrated superior HbA1c reduction and bodyweight change, with lower rates of clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia, versus glargine U100, suggesting that IcoSema might be an effective once-weekly treatment option for insulin-naive individuals with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral glucose-lowering medications. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Long-term safety of oral orforglipron in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (ACHIEVE-J): a multicentre, randomised, open-label, parallel-group phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Orforglipron, an oral GLP-1 receptor agonist, requires further evaluation in east Asian populations with type 2 diabetes, given this group's distinct pathophysiological characteristics. This study aimed to assess orforglipron as add-on treatment to diet and exercise alone or to oral antihyperglycaemic medications in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, open-label phase 3 study was conducted in 40 medical research centres and hospitals in Japan. Adults with type 2 diabetes and elevated glucose levels managing their condition with diet and exercise alone or with one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications were assigned (1:1:1) via computer-generated random sequence to receive once-daily oral orforglipron (3 mg, 12 mg, or 36 mg). Randomisation was stratified by background therapy, baseline HbA1c (≤8·5% or >8·5%), and metformin use (yes vs no; applied only to α-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinedione, and glinides). Investigators, participants, and site staff were not masked to treatment. The primary endpoint was safety for 52 weeks, assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of orforglipron. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT06010004 (ACHIEVE-J). FINDINGS: Between Sept 28, 2023, and June 5, 2025, 450 participants were screened and 401 were randomly assigned to three groups (3 mg, n=132; 12 mg, n=135; and 36 mg, n=134). 352 (88%) completed study treatment. 339 participants (85%, 95% CI 80·7-87·8) had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), more frequently in the 36-mg group (118 [88%, 95% CI 81·5-92·5]) than in the 3-mg (107 [81%, 73·5-86·8]) and 12-mg (114 [84%, 77·4-89·6]) groups. Most TEAEs were of mild (267 [67%, 61·8-71·0]) or moderate (63 [16%, 12·5-19·6]) severity. Discontinuations due to an adverse event occurred in 19 of 134 participants (14%, 95% CI 9·3-21·1) in the 36-mg group compared with seven of 132 (5%, 2·6-10·5) in the 3-mg group and 11 of 135 (8%, 4·6-14·0) in the 12-mg group. Across treatment groups, gastrointestinal symptoms were the most common TEAEs leading to study treatment discontinuation (3 mg: 5 [3·8%, 1·6-8·6]; 12 mg: 8 [5·9%, 3·0-11·3]; and 36 mg: 11 [8·2%, 4·7-14·1]). Level 2 (blood glucose <54 mg/dL) hypoglycaemia events occurred in three of 135 participants in the 12-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·3) and in three of 134 in the 36-mg group (2%, 0·8-6·4) groups. No level 3 (severe) hypoglycaemia events occurred. Outcomes were generally similar across background therapies. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with orforglipron in combination with diet and exercise alone or one or two oral antihyperglycaemic medications for 52 weeks demonstrated an acceptable safety profile in Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly. TRANSLATION: For the Japanese translation of the abstract see Supplementary Materials section.

Aged↗

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

Chemoradiotherapy versus short-course radiotherapy for response-adapted organ preservation in early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer (STAR-TREC): 12-month results of an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Total mesorectal excision (TME) is the standard treatment for most early-stage and intermediate-stage rectal cancer but can cause substantial perioperative morbidity, functional impairment, and reduced quality of life. We assessed whether long-course chemoradiotherapy (LCCRT) or short-course radiotherapy (SCRT) could increase organ preservation and reduce surgery, toxicity, and quality-of-life harms without compromising oncological outcomes. METHODS: STAR-TREC is an international, multicentre, open-label, parallel-group, randomised, phase 2/3 trial in five European countries. Eligible patients were aged 16 years or older in the UK or aged 18 years or older elsewhere, had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-1, and rectal adenocarcinoma (≤40 mm staged as mrT1-T3bN0). In phase 2, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to LCCRT-based organ preservation (LCCRT-OP; 50 Gy in 25 fractions plus oral capecitabine 825 mg/m2 twice daily), SCRT-based organ preservation (SCRT-OP; 25 Gy in five fractions), or primary TME. Phase 2 assessed feasibility, with recruitment at months 12 and 24 as the primary endpoint and feasibility thresholds of four or more and six or more randomisations per month, respectively. Phase 3 adopted a partially randomised patient-preference design, allowing participants to choose either organ preservation or TME. Participants that chose organ preservation were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive LCCRT-OP or SCRT-OP using centralised, computer-generated assignment, with stratification by country and MRI T category (≤T3a vs T3b) using minimisation. The phase 3 primary endpoint was organ-preservation 30 months after treatment initiation, defined as absence of TME, stoma, or local recurrence, which was assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population, which included participants in phase 2 and phase 3. After a planned interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data, the trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee recommended reporting a 12-month, modified intention-to-treat analysis of implementation outcomes for participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023. This study is registered with ISRCTN (14240288) and is closed. FINDINGS: Between June 14, 2017, and April 8, 2024, 503 participants were enrolled at 37 sites. Phase 2 enrolled 120 participants, with recruitment rates of three and six participants per month at months 12 and 24, respectively. Overall, 12-month TME-free survival was 60% (47 of 78 participants). After phase 3 recruitment ended, interim analysis of unmasked phase 2 data showed an early TME-free survival benefit with LCCRT versus SCRT (12-month median TME-free survival not reached [95% CI not reached-not reached] vs 7·6 months [95% CI 6·4-not reached]; hazard ratio [HR] 3·7 [95% CI 1·7-8·0]; posterior probability of superiority >99·5%). The trial steering committee and independent data monitoring committee therefore recommended expanded analysis of 426 participants recruited before Aug 8, 2023: 120 from phase 2 and 306 from phase 3. 17 participants withdrew before treatment, leaving 409 in the modified intention-to-treat population: 163 allocated to LCCRT, 168 to SCRT, and 78 to primary TME. 116 (28%) participants were female and 293 (72%) were male. Among participants who opted for organ preservation, 12-month TME-free survival was 78·5% (95% CI 72·4-85·1) with LCCRT and 60·6% (53·6-68·4) with SCRT (HR 1·90 [95% CI 1·29-2·81]). The most common grade 3-4 serious adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (four [2%] with LCCRT vs six [4%] with SCRT vs six [8%] with TME) and procedural complications (three [2%] with LCCRT vs five [3%] with SCRT vs five [6%] with TME). One participant allocated to primary TME died after an anastomotic leak. INTERPRETATION: These early results support a response-adapted organ-preservation approach, with LCCRT appearing more effective than SCRT at 12 months. Organ-preservation might also reduce treatment-related toxicity compared with primary TME. Longer follow-up is needed for the prespecified 30-month endpoint and definitive functional and oncological outcomes. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK, Stand Up to Cancer, Dutch Cancer Society, Danish Cancer Society, Kom Op Tegen Kanker, Cancerfonden, ALF Region Stockholm, RCC Region Stockholm.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer after disease progression on EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (HARMONi): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ivonescimab has shown clinical efficacy in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC whose disease progressed after third-generation EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy. METHODS: HARMONi is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, phase 3 trial done at 114 cancer centres and hospitals across Asia, Europe, and North America. Eligible patients were aged at least 18 years (upper limit: 75 years in Asia) with stage IIIB/IIIC or IV non-squamous EGFR-mutated NSCLC, disease progression after treatment with a third-generation EGFR-TKI, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) via a centralised interactive voice response system or interactive web response system to receive ivonescimab (20 mg/kg) or placebo plus pemetrexed (500 mg/m2) and carboplatin (target area under the curve 5 mg/mL per min) intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by brain metastases status at enrolment and geographical region. The primary endpoints were progression-free survival by blinded independent radiology review committee and overall survival in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in patients who received at least one dose of trial treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT06396065), has completed enrolment, and is ongoing for treatment and follow-up. FINDINGS: From Jan 25, 2022, to Oct 1, 2024, 660 individuals were screened for eligibility; of these, 438 were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive ivonescimab plus chemotherapy or placebo plus chemotherapy (219 per group). Of enrolled patients, 257 (59%) were female and 181 (41%) were male; 306 (70%) reported race as Asian, and 105 (24%) as White. At a median follow-up of 22·3 months (95% CI 21·5-23·0), 275 progression or death events had occurred in 345 patients (129 events among 172 patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 146 events among 173 patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median progression-free survival was 6·8 months (95% CI 5·7-7·1) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·5) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·52; 95% CI 0·41-0·66; p<0·0001). At a median follow-up of 29·7 months (95% CI 27·7-31·0), 262 deaths occurred in 438 patients (122 in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 140 in the placebo plus chemotherapy group). Median overall survival was 16·8 months (14·3-19·0) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 14·0 months (12·8-15·7) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (HR 0·79; 0·62-1·01). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy versus the placebo plus chemotherapy group were decreased neutrophil count (42 [19%] of 218 vs 36 [17%] of 218), decreased white blood cell count (28 [13%] vs 24 [11%]), decreased platelet count (27 [12%] vs 14 [6%]), and anaemia (22 [10%] vs 27 [12%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events occurred in 61 (28%) patients in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and 33 (15%) patients in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. Treatment-related adverse events led to death in four patients (disease progression, multiple organ dysfunction syndrome, and hepatic failure, each in one patient; gastrointestinal haemorrhage and pulmonary embolism in one patient) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group and five patients (pneumonitis, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular accident, cognitive disorder, and embolic stroke, each in one patient) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group. INTERPRETATION: Ivonescimab plus chemotherapy showed a clinically meaningful and statistically significant progression-free survival benefit in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on EGFR-TKI therapy. The clinical benefit and lack of new safety signals of ivonescimab with chemotherapy support the potential for the combination as a new treatment option in this patient population. FUNDING: Summit Therapeutics.

Humans↗