Search PubMedSearch

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Cluster randomised controlled trial”

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.

1,581 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

Effects of time-restricted eating on markers of glucose metabolism and regulation in individuals with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to investigate the effects of time-restricted eating (TRE) on glucose metabolism and regulation in individuals with prediabetes (fasting blood glucose of 5.6-6.9 mmol/l or HbA1c of 39-47 mmol/mol [5.7-6.4%]) or type 2 diabetes (fasting blood glucose &#x2265;7 mmol/l or HbA1c &#x2265;48 mmol/mol [6.5%]). METHODS: A literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL from inception to 5 August 2025. Moreover, forward and backward citation searches were performed. Eligible studies were RCTs in adults with prediabetes or type 2 diabetes, lasting &#x2265;2 weeks, reporting markers of glucose metabolism and regulation, comparing TRE (&#x2264;12 h eating window) with a non-time-restricted control diet. Studies involving pregnancy, other fasting regimens, or non-peer-reviewed publications were excluded. Data were pooled as weighted mean differences with 95% CIs using random-effects generic inverse variance models in Cochrane Review Manager Web, and results are presented as forest plots. The certainty of evidence was defined using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations methodology, and risk of bias was estimated by using the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomised trials (RoB 2). RESULTS: Out of 2043 records identified through the database search, as well as 1249 from forward and backward citation searches, ten RCTs including 599 participants were included. The mean length of the studies was 4 months, and the eating windows ranged from 4 to 10 h per day. The pooled meta-analysis showed no overall effect of TRE on HbA1c (-3.33 mmol/mol; 95% CI -6.87, 0.20 (-0.30% points; -0.63, 0.02); p=0.06, moderate certainty). Nevertheless, following stratification by subgroups, TRE resulted in a reduction in HbA1c of 0.93 mmol/mol (-1.70, -0.17 [-0.09% points; -0.16, -0.02]; p=0.02) in individuals with prediabetes but not in individuals with type 2 diabetes (-4.68 mmol/mol; -10.08, 0.72 (-0.43% points; -0.92, 0.07); p=0.09). TRE reduced fasting blood glucose in the pooled analysis (-0.30 mmol/l; -0.53, -0.07; p<0.01, moderate certainty) as well as in the subgroup analyses in individuals with prediabetes (-0.14 mmol/l; -0.27, -0.01; p=0.03) and with type 2 diabetes (-0.48 mmol/l; -0.78, -0.17; p<0.01). Moreover, TRE lowered body weight by 1.6 kg (-2.2, -1.0; p<0.001) in the pooled analysis. The evidence was limited by imprecision arising from wide confidence intervals in some of the included studies, which may be due to small sample sizes. Lastly, the effects of TRE on markers of insulin sensitivity, beta cell function and continuous glucose monitoring measurements were inconclusive. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Moderate-certainty evidence indicates that TRE reduces fasting blood glucose but not HbA1c. The subgroup analyses revealed that TRE improved HbA1c and fasting glucose in individuals with prediabetes and improved fasting glucose in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Future large-scale studies should investigate long-term effects of TRE in prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42024523591 FUNDING: This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors. Three authors (JS, A-DT, THA) are employed at Steno Diabetes Center Copenhagen, a public hospital and research institution under the Capital Region of Denmark, partly funded by a grant from the Novo Nordisk Foundation.

Humans

Venetoclax added to dose-adjusted EPOCH-R for newly diagnosed double-hit lymphomas: phase 2 results from ALLIANCE A051701, an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: High-grade B-cell lymphoma with rearrangements of MYC and BCL2 and/or BCL6, known as double-hit lymphoma, is a highly aggressive malignancy with poor outcomes after standard chemoimmunotherapy. We aimed to study whether the addition of the BCL2-inhibitor venetoclax to chemoimmunotherapy in patients with double-hit lymphoma resulted in superior efficacy compared with chemotherapy alone. METHODS: ALLIANCE A051701 is an open-label, randomised, controlled, phase 2-3 trial in separate cohorts of patients with double-hit lymphoma and patients with double-expressor lymphoma. In this analysis, we report phase 2 results from the double-hit lymphoma cohort. Patients aged 18-80 years with newly diagnosed double-hit lymphoma and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0-2 were recruited from 41 hospitals and outpatient clinics in the USA. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive DA-EPOCH-R (dose-adjusted etoposide, prednisone, vincristine, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and rituximab) either alone (DA-EPOCH-R group) or with venetoclax (DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group) using permuted block randomisation schedule. All patients and investigators were aware of group assignment. DA-EPOCH-R was administered on a 21-day schedule for up to six total cycles. Venetoclax was given as 600 mg by mouth daily on days 4-8 of cycle 1 and on days 1-5 of cycles 2-6. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the modified intent-to-treat population inclusive of all eligible patients with centrally confirmed double-hit lymphoma. The safety analysis population consisted of all evaluable patients who received at least one dose of protocol treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03984448) and is closed to enrolment. FINDINGS: 36 patients were randomly assigned to the DA-EPOCH-R group and 37 to the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group between Oct 22, 2019, and Sept 18, 2020. Median age was 65 years (IQR 56-73) and baseline demographic factors were well balanced between groups, with 30 (45%) female and 36 (55%) male patients. Most patients (59 [89%]) were white, two (3%) were Asian, one (2%) was Black or African American, and four (6%) had unknown or unreported ethnicity. The majority of patients had MYC-BCL2 double-hit lymphoma (59 [89%] patients), advanced stage disease (57 [86%] patients), and high-intermediate/high-risk IPI score (42 [64%] patients). Median follow-up was 34&#xb7;7 months (IQR 30&#xb7;1-36&#xb7;8). Median progression-free survival was 28&#xb7;4 months (95% CI 5&#xb7;2-not estimable) in the DA-EPOCH-R group (n=30) and 7&#xb7;7 months (95% CI 4&#xb7;7-NE) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (n=36; hazard ratio [HR] 1&#xb7;13, 95% CI 0&#xb7;53-2&#xb7;37; p=0&#xb7;75). Deaths on treatment occurred in one (3%) patient in the DA-EPOCH-R group (due to dyspnoea; possibly related to treatment) and six (17%) patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (four due to sepsis [three at least possible related and one unrelated], two due to cardiac arrest [at least possibly related]), prompting early closure of the double-hit lymphoma cohort. The most common grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse event was febrile neutropenia, occurring in 15 (43%) of 35 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group and 11 (37%) of 30 patients in the DA-EPOCH-R group. The median overall survival has not been reached in either group. The 24-month overall survival estimates were 72% (95% CI 52-85) in the DA-EPOCH-R group compared with 52% (95% CI 33-68) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (HR 2&#xb7;49, 95% CI 1&#xb7;03-6&#xb7;04; p=0&#xb7;038). INTERPRETATION: The addition of venetoclax to DA-EPOCH-R resulted in excess mortality, prompting early study closure. Robust accrual shows that prospective multicentre trials are feasible in double-hit lymphoma, and the outcomes in the DA-EPOCH-R group serve as a benchmark for future studies. FUNDING: National Cancer Institute of the National Institutes of Health.

Humans

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 (&#x2264;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 (&#x2264;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&#xb7;6 months [95% CI 6&#xb7;4-not reached]; hazard ratio [HR] 3&#xb7;7 [95% CI 1&#xb7;7-8&#xb7;0]; posterior probability of superiority >99&#xb7;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&#xb7;5% (95% CI 72&#xb7;4-85&#xb7;1) with LCCRT and 60&#xb7;6% (53&#xb7;6-68&#xb7;4) with SCRT (HR 1&#xb7;90 [95% CI 1&#xb7;29-2&#xb7;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

Beyond Glycaemia: Fear of Hypoglycaemia, Cognition and Functional Mobility After Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop Therapy in Older Adults With Type 1 Diabetes: A Prespecified Secondary Analysis of a Randomised, Single-Centre Study.

BACKGROUND: Evidence on psychological, cognitive and functional outcomes of advanced diabetes technologies in older adults with long-standing type 1 diabetes (T1D) remains limited. We evaluated whether initiation of advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) therapy was associated with changes in fear of hypoglycaemia, diabetes distress, psychological well-being, cognition, frailty-related measures and mobility-related function in adults aged &#x2265;&#x2009;65&#x2009;years with T1D. METHODS: This prespecified, exploratory secondary analysis was conducted within a single-centre, open-label, randomised, controlled, parallel-group trial including adults aged &#x2265;&#x2009;65&#x2009;years with long-standing T1D. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to initiate AHCL therapy using the MiniMed 780G system or to continue standard diabetes treatment. The secondary outcomes included WHO-5, the 17-item Diabetes Distress Scale (DDS), Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II (HFS-II), Montreal Cognitive Assessment, Digit Symbol Substitution Test, Fried frailty phenotype and performance-based functional measures. No formal sample-size calculation was performed for these secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Thirty-one participants were randomised and 29 completed 12&#x2009;months of follow-up and were included in the treatment-effect analyses. In the baseline-adjusted primary analysis, AHCL therapy was associated with a lower HFS-II score than standard treatment (adjusted mean difference -18.9; 95% CI: -32.4 to -5.4; nominal p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.008), although this finding did not remain statistically significant after Holm correction (adjusted p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.104) or in an exploratory model additionally adjusted for sex (difference -13.6; 95% CI: -32.2 to 5.0; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.145). Diabetes distress, psychological well-being, global cognition and processing speed did not differ between groups. In sex-adjusted sensitivity analyses, the between-group differences remained statistically significant for 6-min walk distance (92.6&#x2009;m; 95% CI: 36.8 to 148.3; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.002) and Timed Up and Go performance (-2.27&#x2009;s; 95% CI: -4.28 to -0.27; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.028), but not for gait speed (0.27&#x2009;m/s; 95% CI: -0.05 to 0.59; p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.099). At 12&#x2009;months, 12 of 14 AHCL participants were robust and 2 were pre-frail; in the control group, 11 of 15 were robust and 4 were pre-frail. No participant was classified as frail at follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: In this small, selected cohort, AHCL therapy was associated with a nominally lower fear-of-hypoglycaemia score and better performance on selected mobility-related tests over 12&#x2009;months. The fear-of-hypoglycaemia finding did not remain statistically significant after correction for multiple comparisons or additional adjustment for sex. Six-minute walk distance and Timed Up and Go remained statistically significant in the exploratory sex-adjusted sensitivity analyses, whereas the gait-speed difference did not. No measurable between-group deterioration in global cognition or processing speed was observed. These exploratory findings require confirmation in larger studies with balanced representation by sex and direct measurement of physical activity. These findings also support a person-centred clinical message: older age alone should not be regarded as a barrier to AHCL when treatment is introduced with individualised education and appropriate ongoing support.

Humans

Manual, digital, and AI tumour-infiltrating lymphocyte scoring: a secondary analysis of the APHINITY randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Stromal tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) are prognostic in early-stage HER2-positive breast cancer, but their role in the context of dual HER2 blockade remains undefined. We evaluated manual, digital, and artificial intelligence (AI)-based sTIL quantification, together with AI-derived spatial metrics, for prognostic and treatment-benefit stratification using tumour samples from the phase 3 APHINITY trial. METHODS: In the APHINITY trial, 4805 patients were randomly assigned to receive chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with pertuzumab or chemotherapy plus trastuzumab with placebo. Median follow-up was 74&#xb7;1 months (IQR 68&#xb7;3-75&#xb7;4). We analysed 4262 haematoxylin and eosin-stained images using manual assessment, an automated digital approach, AI-based lymphocyte quantification (AI percentage lymphocytes), and two AI-derived spatial features (AI-TIL and immune hotspot). Interobserver reproducibility was assessed in 262 randomly chosen tumour samples scored independently by five pathologists. Multivariable Cox models were used to assess associations between TIL levels and invasive disease-free survival (primary outcome in APHINITY), distant recurrence-free interval, and overall survival. The heterogeneity of pertuzumab benefit was evaluated using subgroup analyses, subpopulation treatment effect pattern plot analyses, and nested Cox models with treatment-by-biomarker interaction terms. FINDINGS: Manual scoring showed high interobserver reproducibility (intraclass correlation coefficient 0&#xb7;84 [95% CI 0&#xb7;79-0&#xb7;88]). Concordance between manual and automated methods was modest. AI-based scoring (AI percentage lymphocytes) reclassified 120 (11&#xb7;6%) of 1035 node-positive tumours from immune-low (by manual scoring) to immune-high; this subgroup of patients showed greater separation of 5-year invasive disease-free survival curves between pertuzumab and placebo groups compared with patients whose tumours were concordantly classified as immune-low by both manual and AI-based approaches. Higher levels of TILs were associated with improved invasive disease-free survival for all sTIL measurement approaches and spatial measurements (hazard ratios [HRs] 0&#xb7;41-0&#xb7;93). Pertuzumab was associated with improved invasive disease-free survival at higher sTIL levels across all measurement approaches (HRs 0&#xb7;36-0&#xb7;48), but was not associated with higher values of spatial measures. The largest 6-year absolute improvements with pertuzumab were observed in patients with node-positive disease whose tumours scored in the highest level of immune infiltration of manual sTIL scoring (&#x2265;70&#xb7;0%; mean absolute improvement 12&#xb7;1 percentage points [SD 2&#xb7;8]). In nested prognostic and predictive models, AI-based immune hotspot scores provided the most consistent additional information when combined with any sTIL measurement (all p<0&#xb7;010). INTERPRETATION: Standardised manual sTIL scoring was reproducible, and digital and AI-based methods showed consistent prognostic stratification and potential for treatment-benefit stratification despite only modest correlation between platforms. AI spatial metrics provided complementary information beyond sTIL density and could support more scalable immune assessment. Future studies are needed to validate these approaches in independent cohorts and to clarify their clinical utility for stratifying contemporary HER2-directed therapies. FUNDING: None.

Humans

Intraskeletal Variation in Cortical Bone Quantity in a Medieval Italian Sample: A Multivariate Exploratory Approach.

Bioarcheologists interpret skeletal health by examining variability within and between individuals. Studies of bone loss have generated contradictory and conflicting results regarding the onset and severity of age-related bone loss on a global and temporal scale, perhaps due to mismatched methodologies. Intraskeletal comparisons of bone tissue prove challenging precisely because of heterogeneous baselines in quantity and remodeling of cortical bone throughout the skeleton, as well as evolutionary histories and environmental impacts on growth and development. Here we analyze cortical bone indicators from the rib, metacarpal, and femoral cortical bone in a subset of individuals (n&#x2009;=&#x2009;72) regions from the medieval Italian archaeological site of Pieve di Pava. To facilitate intraskeletal comparisons across elements with different biological baselines, we standardize cortical bone parameters using z-scores. Variation in relative intraskeletal cortical bone was assessed using accessible multivariate methods (principal component analysis and hierarchical cluster analysis). Results suggest an association between femoral and metacarpal cortical bone values, with stochastic trends in metacarpal and femoral relative bone quantity in relation to the rib bone quantity at the sample level. Our study demonstrates that while intraskeletal analyses are challenging, they are made more robust by synthesizing multivariate methods alongside exploratory data analysis (EDA) methods to tack between sample-level and individual-level scales and variability. Ultimately, we advocate for leveraging multivariate techniques not as a final step, but rather as a means of generating new hypotheses and challenging tendencies to a priori establish typological groups in the research process.

Skeleton

Mendelian randomisation for rheumatology: beyond hype-what it's good for, what it can't do, and how to read it critically.

Mendelian randomisation (MR) has become abundant in the literature, with variation in quality and frequent overinterpretation of causality. This creates a problem for clinical readers, reviewers, and editors: some MR studies can sharpen causal thinking, prioritise drug targets, and challenge misleading observational claims, whereas others are little more than automated exposure-outcome scans with causal claims disproportionate to the evidence. MR can strengthen causal inference when randomised trials are impractical and conventional observational studies are vulnerable to confounding, reverse causation, or selection bias. In rheumatology, credible MR can contribute to questions about disease aetiology, modifiable risk factors, therapeutic target validation, adverse-effect anticipation, and phenotype validation. However, its interpretation depends on whether the exposure is plausibly instrumentable, whether the genetic instruments are biologically defensible, whether assumptions are interrogated in ways appropriate to the design, and whether findings are triangulated with clinical, observational, experimental, and mechanistic evidence. Instead of recapitulating all methodological issues of MR, this review aims to help rheumatologists distinguish robust MR from weak or overinterpreted analyses quickly. We provide an accessible framework for reading and triaging MR studies in rheumatology. Papers that use poorly justified instruments, treat medication use as drug-target evidence, interpret genetic liability as diagnosis, rely on mechanical sensitivity analyses, ignore prior evidence or ask no clinically meaningful question can often be passed over by readers. The goal is not to discourage MR in rheumatology, but to raise the standard; useful MR should clarify causal reasoning rather than simply generate another statistically significant association.

Journal Article

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&#xb7;3 months (95% CI 21&#xb7;5-23&#xb7;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&#xb7;8 months (95% CI 5&#xb7;7-7&#xb7;1) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 4&#xb7;4 months (4&#xb7;1-5&#xb7;5) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0&#xb7;52; 95% CI 0&#xb7;41-0&#xb7;66; p<0&#xb7;0001). At a median follow-up of 29&#xb7;7 months (95% CI 27&#xb7;7-31&#xb7;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&#xb7;8 months (14&#xb7;3-19&#xb7;0) in the ivonescimab plus chemotherapy group versus 14&#xb7;0 months (12&#xb7;8-15&#xb7;7) in the placebo plus chemotherapy group (HR 0&#xb7;79; 0&#xb7;62-1&#xb7;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

A New Highly Concentrated Insulin Aspart AT278 (500&#x2009;U/mL) Demonstrates Ultra-Rapid Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Properties in Type 2 Diabetes Regardless of BMI.

AIMS: To evaluate the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a novel U500 insulin aspart formulation (AT278 [500&#x2009;U/mL]; AT278-U500) compared with standard concentration insulin aspart (InsAsp [100&#x2009;U/mL]; InsAsp-U100) and U500 human regular insulin (HumIns [500&#x2009;IU/mL]; HumIns-U500). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-centre, randomised, double-blind crossover 12-h euglycaemic clamp study was conducted in 41 overweight and obese people with type 2 diabetes (BMI 25.0-38.7&#x2009;kg/m2) receiving a single subcutaneous dose (0.5&#x2009;U/kg) of AT278-U500 and InsAsp-U100. HumIns-U500 was consecutively studied open label in a 24-h clamp. RESULTS: AT278-U500 exhibited a significantly faster insulin absorption than InsAsp-U100 and HumIns-U500 (t Early50%Cmax: 9&#x2009;min vs. 35&#x2009;min vs. 55&#x2009;min), leading to a significantly higher glucose-lowering effect within the first hour (AUCGIR,0-60min) compared with both InsAsp-U100 (treatment ratio 2.02 [95% CI 1.64; 2.50]) and HumIns-U500 (3.91 [2.89; 5.27]). When divided by median BMI (29.7&#x2009;kg/m2), AUCGIR,0-60min was significantly higher with AT278-U500 in both the low-BMI and high-BMI subgroup compared to InsAsp-U100. Linear regression showed a significant inverse relationship between BMI and AUCGIR,0-60min for InsAsp-U100 (slope -0.142, p&#x2009;<&#x2009;0.0001), whereas AT278-U500 showed no such relationship. Overall insulin exposure was similar for AT278-U500 and InsAsp-U100, while overall glucose-lowering effect was comparable across all three treatments. CONCLUSIONS: AT278-U500 maintains its ultra-rapid onset characteristics independent of BMI, representing the first ultra-rapid U500 option for prandial dosing in insulin-resistant people with type 2 diabetes requiring high-dose therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05754424.

Humans

Strategies to improve recruitment to randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Recruiting participants to randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is challenging. Identifying effective recruitment strategies would benefit health research: poor recruitment leads to underpowered trials, reducing the reliability of findings and increasing the risk of wasted resources, ethical concerns, and trial failure. Evidence to inform recruitment strategies is increasingly generated through Studies Within A Trial (SWATs), which are methodological studies embedded within host RCTs. This is an update of a review last published in 2018. OBJECTIVES: Primary: to quantify the effects of strategies to improve recruitment of participants to RCTs. Secondary: to evaluate recruitment strategies' cost-effectiveness and impact on retention, and the equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) characteristics of recruited participants. SEARCH METHODS: We used MEDLINE, Embase, and six other databases to identify the studies included in the review. We also sought unpublished recruitment SWATs through social media and targeted email dissemination to trial methodology networks. The latest search date was 16 February 2023. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised SWATs evaluating trial recruitment strategies embedded in healthcare and non-healthcare trials. We excluded quasi-randomised, hypothetical, questionnaire-only, retention-only, or clinician incentive studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Primary outcome: proportion of eligible participants or centres recruited. SECONDARY OUTCOMES: cost-effectiveness, retention rates, and EDI characteristics of included participants. We conducted random-effects meta-analysis for strategies evaluated in at least two studies; otherwise, we synthesised results narratively. We reported effects as risk differences (RDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), and assessed between-trial heterogeneity. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for the primary outcome. We expressed cost-effectiveness as the incremental cost per additional participant recruited in pounds sterling (GBP). MAIN RESULTS: We identified 91 eligible studies (53 new to this update), providing 94 comparisons and involving at least 176,747 participants. Eighty-one studies involved strategies aimed at trial participants, while 10 evaluated strategies aimed at recruiters. All were healthcare studies. We found 65 recruitment strategies; 49 were evaluated in a single study. Only five strategies were supported by high-certainty evidence according to GRADE criteria, and we focus on these strategies in the summary below. Open-label trials versus blinded, placebo trials. Open-label trials recruited more participants than blinded trials (RD 10%, 95% CI 8% to 12%; 3 studies, 9004 participants), corresponding to approximately 10 additional participants per 100 approached. The studies involved mostly women in the UK and Estonia. No cost or retention data were reported. Telephone reminder versus no telephone reminder. Telephone reminders to people who did not respond to an initial postal invitation boosted recruitment by 6% (95% CI 3% to 9%; 2 studies, 1450 participants), in trials with low underlying recruitment (we are less certain for trials with over 10% recruitment). The studies involved people with a mean age of 58 years in Canada and Norway. No cost or retention data were reported. Recruitment primer letter versus no letter. Pre-recruitment letters and leaflets designed to encourage participation made little or no difference to recruitment (absolute improvement 1%, 95% CI -1% to 2%; 2 studies, 5376 participants), and were associated with increased costs compared to not sending a primer (incremental cost: GBP 2.08). The studies involved mostly older white people in the UK and Ireland. Multimedia information via a digital link/QR code plus paper participant information leaflet (PIL) versus paper PIL alone. This made little or no difference to recruitment (absolute improvement 0%, 95% CI -1% to 1%; 7 studies, 11,612 participants) and retention (absolute improvement 0%, 95% CI -2% to 3%; 5 studies, 7403 participants), and increased costs compared to not including multimedia information (incremental cost: GBP 0.78). The studies involved people in the UK. Optimised, user-tested PIL versus standard PIL. Optimising participant information leaflets (e.g. through user-testing the leaflet with the target population to shape its content, format, and appearance) made little or no difference to recruitment: absolute improvement was 0% (95% CI 0% to 1%; 6 studies, 27,805 participants). The studies involved people in the UK. Only one study reported EDI data; participants were mostly older women. No cost or retention data were reported. We had moderate-certainty evidence for 13 other strategies; confidence was often reduced because the results came from single studies. Seven strategies involved changes to how potential participants received information; four involved changes to trial conduct; one targeted the recruiter or recruitment site; and one tested non-monetary incentives. We had much less confidence in the other 47 comparisons because the studies had design flaws, were single studies, or had very uncertain results. Costs were reported in only 17 of 91 studies. Strategy impact on retention was reported in 15 studies. All but one study (99%) were from high-income countries. The most reported demographics were age (49 studies), sex (32 studies), gender (27 studies), and education level (16 studies). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The evidence on strategies to improve trial recruitment remains broad but lacks depth. Of 65 strategies evaluated, only five were supported by high-certainty evidence. Open-label trial designs and telephone reminders to non-responders increased recruitment, while optimised participant information leaflets, recruitment primer letters, and multimedia information provided alongside a paper participant information leaflet had little or no effect. Reporting of participant characteristics was poor, limiting assessment of equity, diversity, and inclusion across most studies. Evidence is heavily skewed toward high-income countries. Future research must prioritise evaluations in low-to-middle-income settings and consistently report cost, retention, and EDI outcomes. We strongly urge the methodology research community to strengthen the evidence base by prioritising replications of existing strategies over the development and testing of new ones. FUNDING: National Institute for Health and Care Research (Advanced Fellowship, Adwoa Parker, reference:NIHR302256). Health Research Board, Republic of Ireland, Evidence Synthesis Ireland (grant ESI-2021-001) REGISTRATION: This review updates an earlier Cochrane review, which was first published in 2002 and subsequently updated in 2007, 2010, and 2018. Previous versions of the review and their protocols are available at: https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub2 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub3 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub4 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub5 https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.MR000013.pub6.

Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic

Effect of a pharmacist-led mHealth app on adherence, quality of life, and glycaemic control in diabetes: A multicentre RCT.

AIMS: To evaluate whether CareAide&#xae;, a pharmacist-driven mHealth application, improves medication adherence, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and glycaemic control in diabetes mellitus using structural equation modelling. METHODS: Pre-specified secondary analysis of the type 2 diabetes mellitus cohort from a 6-month multicentre open-label randomised controlled trial (N&#xa0;=&#xa0;663) across three Malaysian hospitals. Adherence was assessed by MMAS-8 (subjective) and Proportion of Days Covered (PDC; pharmacy-verified). HRQoL was measured by AQoL-6D and EQ-5D-5&#xa0;L. Structural equation modelling (SEM), Necessary Condition Analysis, and Importance-Performance Map Analysis (cIPMA) were applied. RESULTS: CareAide&#xae; produced large adherence gains (MMAS-8: 7.31 vs 5.55, d&#xa0;=&#xa0;1.64; PDC&#xa0;&#x2265;&#xa0;80%: 81.6% vs 33.0%; both p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001). Early 3-month adherence was the strongest predictor of sustained 6-month adherence in both models (&#x3b2; std&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.567 and 0.688; p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001). AQoL-6D utility improved significantly (0.669 vs 0.618; d&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.353, p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001), driven by coping (d&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.447) and relationships (d&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.254) domains. HRQoL did not mediate adherence; gains were a direct independent benefit. The intervention effect on HbA1c was not statistically significant in the PDC-based SEM model (&#x3b2;&#xa0;=&#xa0;&#xa0;-&#xa0;0.333, p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.065); a group difference was, however, supported by baseline-adjusted ANCOVA (&#x3b2;&#xa0;=&#xa0;&#xa0;-&#xa0;0.41%, p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.002), and the complete-case comparison was non-significant (p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.153), so glycaemic findings warrant cautious interpretation. cIPMA identified the intervention as the primary optimisation target. CONCLUSIONS: CareAide&#xae; significantly improves medication adherence and psychosocial quality of life. Evidence for glycaemic benefit came from baseline-adjusted analysis (ANCOVA), though findings should be interpreted with caution given incomplete HbA1c data at one site. The first three months are the most critical period for pharmacist support. In this dataset, PDC appeared more sensitive than MMAS-8 to the HbA1c signal within 6&#xa0;months, but this finding requires confirmation in longer studies with more complete HbA1c data. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06068309.

Aged

Durvalumab and tremelimumab, with or without lenvatinib, combined with transarterial chemoembolisation in participants with embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (EMERALD-3): a global, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Transarterial chemoembolisation (TACE), a standard treatment for embolisation-eligible hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), induces tumour immune responses. Single tremelimumab regular interval durvalumab (STRIDE) is a standard treatment in advanced HCC. In this phase 3 trial, we assessed the efficacy and safety of STRIDE, with or without lenvatinib, plus TACE, in participants with embolisation-eligible HCC. METHODS: EMERALD-3 is a phase 3, randomised, open-label, sponsor-blinded study, conducted at 177 medical sites in 21 countries. Eligible participants were 18 years or older (aged &#x2265;21 years in Egypt or Singapore) at screening and had confirmed HCC (by imaging or histopathologically from biopsy specimen, surgery, or both) not amenable to curative surgery, curative ablation, or transplantation but amenable to TACE. Participants had Child-Pugh class A liver function, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, and at least one measurable target intrahepatic lesion per modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. Participants were randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, STRIDE plus TACE, or TACE until each group reached its preplanned enrolment target of 175 participants. After the STRIDE plus TACE group reached its enrolment target, randomisation was adjusted to continue in a 1:1 ratio between the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group and TACE group until approximately 275 participants were enrolled in each of these two groups. Randomisation used a centrally assigned interactive response technology system, stratified by region, baseline tumour burden, and previous palliative embolisation. In the STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE group, on the first day, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab intravenously, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab plus oral lenvatinib (8 mg for <60 kg bodyweight or 12 mg for &#x2265;60 kg bodyweight); participants then received 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks plus once-daily lenvatinib for up to 36 cycles. In the STRIDE plus TACE group, participants were given 300 mg tremelimumab and 1500 mg durvalumab intravenously on the first day, followed by 1500 mg durvalumab every 4 weeks. The technique and number of TACE procedures were at the investigators' discretion, with the first procedure administered at least 7 days after the first dose of durvalumab in the two investigation treatment groups and within 7 days of random allocation in the TACE group. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE. Key secondary endpoints were overall survival for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus TACE and progression-free survival and overall survival for STRIDE plus TACE versus TACE. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05301842), with enrolment completed. FINDINGS: From March 28, 2022, to Nov 20, 2024, 1124 participants were screened. The full analysis set comprised 760 participants, who were randomly allocated to STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (n=293), STRIDE plus TACE (n=175), or TACE (n=292). 633 (83%) participants were male and 127 (17%) were female; 548 (72%) were Asian. At the first data cutoff (Sept 2, 2025); the overall median follow-up for progression-free survival was 10&#xb7;0 months (IQR 4&#xb7;6-17&#xb7;2); median follow-up for progression-free survival was 11&#xb7;0 months (IQR 4&#xb7;8-18&#xb7;4) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 8&#xb7;3 months (4&#xb7;1-15&#xb7;5) for TACE. Median progression-free survival was 13&#xb7;0 months (95% CI 12&#xb7;2-16&#xb7;7) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus 9&#xb7;8 months (8&#xb7;0-11&#xb7;4) for TACE (HR 0&#xb7;70 [95% CI 0&#xb7;57-0&#xb7;86]; p=0&#xb7;0007). At the second data cutoff (Feb 23, 2026) and a median follow-up for overall survival of 24&#xb7;6 months (IQR 16&#xb7;5-31&#xb7;5) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 22&#xb7;9 months (14&#xb7;9-30&#xb7;2) for TACE, median overall survival was 39&#xb7;5 months (95% CI 34&#xb7;1-not reached) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 34&#xb7;7 months (28&#xb7;8-not reached) for TACE (HR 0&#xb7;84 [95% CI 0&#xb7;65-1&#xb7;09]; p=0&#xb7;18). At this data cutoff, median progression-free survival was 12&#xb7;9 months (95% CI 10&#xb7;2-15&#xb7;9) for STRIDE plus TACE and 8&#xb7;1 months (6&#xb7;5-10&#xb7;2) for the first 175 participants randomised to TACE (HR 0&#xb7;71 [95% CI 0&#xb7;56-0&#xb7;91]), with median follow-up of 10&#xb7;3 months (IQR 4&#xb7;6-23&#xb7;7) for STRIDE plus TACE and 7&#xb7;7 months (3&#xb7;0-18&#xb7;5) for the first 175 participants randomly allocated to TACE. The most common adverse events of maximum grade 3 or 4 were hypertension (34 [12%] of 287) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, post-embolisation syndrome and anaemia (ten [6%] of 175 each) for STRIDE plus TACE, and post-embolisation (17 [6%] of 290) for TACE. 184 (64%) participants receiving STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE, 89 (51%) receiving STRIDE plus TACE, and 68 (23%) receiving TACE had serious adverse events. Treatment-related adverse events with an outcome of death during the treatment-emergent period occurred in seven (2%) of 287 participants who received STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE (two for myocarditis; and one each for hepatic failure, haemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis, septic shock, cardiac failure, and unknown cause), none of 175 participants who received STRIDE plus TACE, and two (1%) of 290 participants who received TACE (one each for acute myocardial infarction and unknown cause). INTERPRETATION: STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE showed a statistically significant progression-free survival improvement versus TACE. These findings support a STRIDE-based regimen as a potential new treatment option for people with embolisation-eligible HCC; additional follow-up is being conducted for final analysis of overall survival across treatment groups. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Adult

Dissociable neural mechanisms of cognitive enhancement through transcranial stimulation and behavioral training.

BACKGROUND: Transcranial direct current stimulation (tDCS) and adaptive working memory (WM) training are promising cognitive enhancement approaches; however, their neural mechanisms and potential synergies remain poorly understood. OBJECTIVE: We directly compared how tDCS and WM training modulate neural oscillations during WM performance and examined whether combining both interventions produces additive effects. METHODS: We randomized 112 healthy adults into four groups: control (sham tDCS&#xa0;+&#xa0;non-adaptive 1-back), tDCS-only (active tDCS&#xa0;+&#xa0;non-adaptive 1-back), training-only (sham tDCS&#xa0;+&#xa0;adaptive n-back training), or combined (active tDCS&#xa0;+&#xa0;adaptive training). Participants underwent five daily intervention sessions. We recorded high-density EEG during transfer n-back tasks at baseline, post-intervention, and one-week follow-up. RESULTS: All active interventions improved WM performance relative to the control group, with the combined group showing the largest gains (n-back accuracy: +15.6% vs.&#xa0;+&#xa0;10.1% tDCS-only, +9.7% training-only, +0.7% control; all p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001). Critically, tDCS selectively increased gamma-band (30-50&#xa0;Hz) power in the frontal and parietal regions (cluster p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.018, d&#xa0;>&#xa0;1.0), whereas WM training enhanced frontal theta-band (4-8&#xa0;Hz) power and theta-gamma phase-amplitude coupling (both cluster p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.012, d&#xa0;>&#xa0;0.85). The combined group exhibited both neural signatures. Brain-behavior correlations revealed dissociable relationships: gamma increases predicted n-back accuracy improvements (r&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.61, p&#xa0;<&#xa0;0.001), whereas theta enhancements correlated with operation span gains (r&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.58, p&#xa0;=&#xa0;0.002). CONCLUSIONS: tDCS and WM training enhance cognition through distinct yet complementary neural mechanisms: tDCS via gamma-mediated cortical excitability and WM training via theta-mediated cognitive control. These findings provide neurophysiological evidence for multimodal enhancement strategies that target parallel pathways within WM networks.

Humans

Molecular Landscape and Advanced Diagnostic Technologies for BRAF Mutations in Cancer: From Quantitative PCR and ddPCR to CRISPR-Based Platforms.

BRAF mutations are key oncogenic alterations across multiple malignancies, including melanoma, thyroid carcinoma, colorectal cancer, non-small cell lung cancer, glioma, and hairy cell leukemia. The most prevalent variant, BRAF-V600E, induces constitutive activation of the MAPK signaling pathway, promoting tumor progression and influencing therapeutic responsiveness. Accurate detection of BRAF alterations is therefore essential for molecular classification, prognostic assessment, treatment selection, and resistance surveillance. This review summarizes the molecular heterogeneity of BRAF mutations and critically evaluates current diagnostic methodologies. Conventional approaches such as allele-specific PCR and Sanger sequencing are compared with advanced quantitative platforms, including high-resolution melting analysis, droplet digital PCR, and next-generation sequencing, with emphasis on analytical sensitivity, mutation coverage, and clinical applicability. Emerging technologies such as CRISPR-based assays, rolling circle amplification systems, and nanoparticle-based biosensors and point-of-care diagnostic platforms are also discussed for their potential to enhance ultra-sensitive detection, particularly in liquid biopsy settings. These emerging tools are highlighted for their potential to enable ultra-sensitive, rapid, and decentralized mutation detection, particularly in liquid biopsy settings. Key challenges, including intratumoral heterogeneity, low allele-frequency variants, FFPE-associated artifacts, and clonal evolution under therapeutic pressure, are examined within a translational framework. In addition, we examine critical barriers to clinical implementation, including standardization, cost, and global accessibility of molecular diagnostics, and outline potential solutions through scalable technologies and decentralized testing strategies. We propose that optimal BRAF testing requires a mutation subclass-informed and clinically integrated strategy combining comprehensive baseline profiling with longitudinal molecular monitoring. Future diagnostic paradigms will likely integrate multi-omics data and artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted interpretation to refine precision oncology implementation. Looking forward, we propose that optimal BRAF testing will require integration of multi-omics profiling with AI-assisted interpretation, enabling automated variant classification, real-time clinical decision support, and improved prediction of therapeutic response and resistance.

Humans

Evaluation of oral health-related quality of life following pulp therapy or extraction in paediatric patients: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Treatment decision between pulp therapy and extraction for compromised teeth in paediatric patients remains a topic of debate. While both approaches address the associated pain, their long-term impact on children's well-being remains unclear. This systematic review aimed to analyse and compare the impact of pulp therapy and extraction on OHRQoL in paediatric patients. METHODS: This review was conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed in multiple electronic databases. Methodological quality and risk of bias were evaluated using the RoB 2 tool for randomised controlled trials, ROBINS-I tool for non-randomised trials, and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for observational studies. RESULTS: Seven studies comprising a total of 1367 participants met the inclusion criteria. The results indicated that pulp therapy was associated with superior OHRQoL outcomes compared to extraction. Children who underwent pulp therapy reported lower anxiety, better emotional well-being, and higher parental satisfaction. Given the heterogeneity among the studies, a narrative synthesis was performed. CONCLUSION: Pulp therapy may offer better OHRQoL outcomes than extractions in paediatric patients by preserving function, reducing anxiety, and minimising long-term complications. However, these findings should be interpreted cautiously since&#xa0;the available evidence was limited and of low to very low certainty. Further well-designed randomised controlled trials are required.

Children

Single-cell transcriptomics reveals heterogeneous stress responses and Mg2+-mediated survival mechanisms in Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus during freeze-drying and storage.

Maintaining the viability of lactic acid bacteria during dehydration and subsequent storage remains a significant challenge. Here, we employed single-cell RNA sequencing to reveal the heterogeneous stress responses of Lactobacillus delbrueckii subsp. bulgaricus, identifying seven distinct transcriptional clusters across the liquid culture, freeze-drying, and storage phases. The dominant clusters in the freeze-drying and storage were not completely consistent, showing significant functional differentiation. Genomic stability may be important for survival during freeze-drying and storage, while intracellular energy homeostasis appears important for viability during storage. The magnesium transporter mgtB was highly expressed in clusters tolerant to freeze-drying and storage, suggesting a critical role for Mg2+ homeostasis. Further experimental validation confirmed that Mg2+ treatment significantly bolstered stress resistance, increasing immediate post-freeze-drying survival by over 2-fold (up to 92.90%) and post-storage survival by over 5-fold (up to 5.98%). Proteomic data indicated that Mg2+ supplementation correlated with the maintenance of several biological functions potentially relevant to bacterial survival during freeze-drying and storage, including DNA repair, translation, and central carbon metabolism. These findings provide a map of microbial stress resistance through population heterogeneity and offer a potential strategy that may be adapted for enhancing the stability of other industrial lactic acid bacteria products.

Freeze Drying

Comparative analyses of olfactory receptor repertoires in Schizothorax fish based on the chromosome-level genomes: Implications for regulatory roles of dietary differentiation and ploidy variation.

The olfactory receptor (OR) genes constitute the molecular basis of fish olfaction, mediating survival behaviors and environmental adaptation while coevolving with habitat-driven evolution. Schizothorax, a cyprinid genus endemic to the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, exhibits remarkable dietary divergence and ploidy variation in response to plateau environmental changes, which presumably facilitates the adaptive evolution of OR genes. However, the evolutionary patterns of OR genes associated with trophic divergence and ploidy variation in this genus remain unclear. In this study, three species were selected: the herbivorous diploid S. macropogon, the carnivorous diploid S. lantsangensis, and the herbivorous tetraploid S. curvilabiatus. S. macropogon possessed 142 OR genes (92.25% functional), primarily located on chromosomes 14 and 24, with the fewest sequence clusters. Such compact gene repertoire and highly overlapping chromosomal clusters indicated specialization for a herbivorous olfactory niche. S. lantsangensis contained 127 OR genes (93.70% functional), concentrated on chromosomes 4 and 5, with fewer sequence clusters and a scattered distribution, reflecting evolution of OR genes under carnivorous feeding habits. The herbivorous tetraploid S. curvilabiatus exhibited striking features: 316 OR genes (94.30% functional), the most subfamilies, unique &#x3b5; and &#x3ba; OR subfamilies, and species-specific motifs. These characteristics revealed that ploidy, rather than herbivory, dominated OR gene evolution. In conclusion, dietary differentiation and ploidy variation together drove olfactory adaptive evolution in Schizothorax, providing new insights into vertebrate OR gene ecological adaptation.

Animals

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

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of elagolix with dienogest in women with moderate-to-severe endometriosis-associated pain. DESIGN: A multicentre, double-blind, double-dummy, randomised, parallel-group, active-controlled, non-inferiority phase III study. SETTING: Nineteen clinical centres across India. STUDY POPULATION: Women (18-49&#x2009;years) diagnosed with endometriosis and experiencing moderate-to-severe pain. METHODS: Participants were randomised (1:1) to receive oral elagolix (150&#x2009;mg once daily) or dienogest (2&#x2009;mg once daily) for 24&#x2009;weeks. OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was change in endometriosis-related pain (Numeric Rating Scale [NRS]) from baseline to Day 85. Secondary outcomes included changes in NRS (Day 169), dysmenorrhoea, non-menstrual pelvic pain (NMPP) scores (Days 85 and 169), rescue medication use, patient global impression of change (PGIC), adverse events and bone mineral density. RESULTS: Of 340 patients screened, 230 were randomised (115 per group). At Day 85, both arms showed similar reductions in NRS pain scores with a treatment difference of 0.04 (95% CI: -0.3, 0.37) [p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.9747] demonstrating non-inferiority as upper 95% CI was below pre-specified margin of 1.5. At Day 169, both arms showed comparable improvements in overall pain, dysmenorrhoea and NMPP from baseline (p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.9372, p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.8884, and p&#x2009;=&#x2009;0.9616, respectively). Rescue medication use and PGIC were comparable between treatment arms. Adverse event incidence was similar (elagolix: 14.8%; dienogest: 19.1%), with no serious TEAEs or discontinuations. No significant bone mineral density changes were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Elagolix demonstrated non-inferiority to dienogest with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile, supporting its use in managing endometriosis-associated pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: CTRI/2023/01/049292.

Humans