SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “South Asian”

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.

120 records · Page 7Linked to original sources

PubMed2026

Lateral Femoral Condyle Angle Is an Anatomic Risk Factor for Anterior Cruciate Ligament Primary Injury and Secondary Graft Rerupture.

PURPOSE: To define the lateral femoral condylar angle (LFCA)-a parameter measuring condylar inclination-and assess its predictive capacity for primary and recurrent anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries. METHODS: Patients aged 18 to 50 years who underwent primary ACL reconstruction between 2017 and 2022 were screened. Those with graft rerupture were matched 1:1:1 by sex, age, body mass index, and meniscal status to ACL-intact controls and patients without graft failure during a minimum 48-month follow-up. LFCA was measured as the angle between the long axis of the distal femur and the axis of the lateral femoral condyle, alongside 38 established parameters using preoperative 3.0-T magnetic resonance imaging scans. Intergroup differences were assessed with one-way analysis of variance; multivariate regression and receiver operating characteristic analyses identified independent predictors and evaluated predictive performance. RESULTS: The study included 540 patients (180 per group: primary ACL injury, rerupture, controls). One-way analysis of variance revealed a significant gradient in LFCA across controls (81.3°, 95% CI: 80.8-81.8°), primary injuries (81.9°, 95% CI: 81.5-82.3°), and reruptures (84.2°, 95% CI: 83.7-84.6°) (P < .001). In multivariate models adjusted for baseline factors, LFCA independently predicted primary injury (odds ratio [OR] = 1.27, 95% CI: 1.13-1.42, P < .001; area under the curve [AUC] = .576) and rerupture (OR = 1.46, 95% CI: 1.21-1.76, P < .001; AUC = .704). Combined models incorporating LFCA with tibial slopes, notch angle, and notch height achieved an AUC of .847 for primary injury prediction, whereas models with LFCA, lateral condylar flexion curvature radius, slope asymmetry, and tibial AP distance reached an AUC of .817 for rerupture. LFCA alone with lateral condylar flexion curvature radius yielded an AUC of .777 for rerupture prediction. Sex-stratified analyses confirmed LFCA predicted rerupture in both male patients (OR = 1.44, 95% CI: 1.19-1.75) and female patients (OR = 1.49, 95% CI: 1.16-1.92), and primary injury in male patients (OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 1.15-1.48). CONCLUSIONS: LFCA is an independent predictor of ACL injury, showing particular strength in identifying Asian patients at high risk for graft rerupture. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, retrospective case-control study.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Telmisartan-based monotherapy and combination regimens for blood pressure control in adults with hypertension: a systematic review, meta-analysis, and GRADE assessment.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy, safety, and certainty of evidence for telmisartan-based antihypertensive regimens in adults with hypertension. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed PRISMA 2020. PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to 2026. Eligible studies enrolled adults with hypertension and compared telmisartan monotherapy or telmisartan-containing combinations with placebo, usual care, non-telmisartan antihypertensive agents, or alternative telmisartan-based regimens. Continuous outcomes were pooled as mean differences (MDs) and dichotomous outcomes as risk ratios (RRs), both with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), using random-effects models, with additional subgroup analyses conducted by comparator type. Risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. RESULTS: Twenty-five included reports (24 unique trials, since two reports present secondary outcomes from the same underlying trial) involving 6,521 participants were included, spanning placebo-controlled, usual-care-controlled, active-comparator, and telmisartan-combination-versus-telmisartan-monotherapy designs. Telmisartan-based therapy significantly reduced office systolic blood pressure (MD - 6.39 mm Hg; 95% CI - 7.86 to - 4.93; low certainty) and office diastolic blood pressure (MD - 4.88 mm Hg; 95% CI - 6.67 to - 3.09; low certainty), although the magnitude of effect was comparator-dependent. Based on only two trials, 24-h ambulatory systolic blood pressure (MD - 7.16 mm Hg; 95% CI - 10.61 to - 3.72) and ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (MD - 4.42 mm Hg; 95% CI - 6.36 to - 2.48) were reduced with moderate certainty. Telmisartan-based regimens improved blood pressure response (RR 1.68; 95% CI 1.31 to 2.16; moderate certainty) but not blood pressure control achievement (RR 1.44; 95% CI 0.92 to 2.24; very low certainty). Overall adverse events, dizziness, and headache were comparable (very low to low certainty), while edema was less frequent with telmisartan-based therapy (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.15 to 0.73; moderate certainty). CONCLUSION: Telmisartan-based regimens, particularly fixed-dose and multidrug combinations, effectively reduce office and ambulatory blood pressure and improve blood pressure response, with broadly comparable short-term safety and less edema. These effect sizes are comparator-dependent, and certainty of evidence for absolute blood pressure control achievement and for major adverse events is very low; heterogeneity, limited long-term data, and a predominance of Asian-population trials warrant cautious interpretation pending larger, higher-quality, and more geographically diverse confirmatory studies.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

BLIS study: a feasibility randomised controlled trial assessing compliance, acceptability and colonisation with different dosing regimens of the probiotic supplement Streptococcus salivarius K12 (Bactoblis) in adults in England.

OBJECTIVES: Streptococcus salivarius K12 (SsK12) is a bacterium used as a probiotic with some evidence for preventing acute sore throat/tonsillitis, but the optimal dosing strategy is unclear. This study aimed to evaluate two dosing regimens of SsK12 to establish (a) the prevalence and duration of colonisation with SsK12 and (b) the acceptability and feasibility of these regimens. DESIGN: A randomised, non-blinded feasibility trial. SETTING: Primary care in the south of England. PARTICIPANTS: Adults with ≥2 episodes of sore throat within the 3 years before recruitment. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomised to take SsK12 lozenges once weekly or daily over 14 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the prevalence and duration of colonisation with SsK12. This was determined by real-time PCR conducted on self-taken whole-mouth swabs provided by participants at baseline and on days 2, 7, 14, 21 and 35. Secondary outcomes were the compliance and acceptability of the two SsK12 dosing regimens, based on questionnaire data. RESULTS: 53 participants were recruited (26 randomised to weekly and 27 to daily dosing) between 26 April and 5 December 2023. All swabs were returned by 65.4% (17/26) and 70.4% (19/27) of the weekly and daily groups respectively. Swabs at all timepoints from participants with PCR positives observed at baseline (two and four from the weekly and daily group, respectively) were excluded. Therefore, swabs from 23 participants in the weekly and 22 in the daily group did not have evidence of baseline colonisation and were included in the microbiology analysis. SsK12 colonisation was found in 59.1% (13/22, 95% CI 38.6% to 79.6%) of samples in both groups on day 2; in 13.6% (3/22, 95% CI 0.0% to 28.0%) and 85.7% (18/21, 95% CI 70.8% to 100.0%) of the weekly and daily groups, respectively, on day 7; in 19.1% (4/21, 95% CI 2.3% to 35.8%) and 59.1% (13/22, 95% CI 38.6% to 79.6%), respectively, on day 14; and in only one participant (weekly group) on days 21 and 35. The dosing regimen was reported as easy to follow by 85.0% (17/20, 95% CI 69.4% to 100.0%) of the weekly and 96.2% (25/26, 95% CI 88.8% to 100.0%) of the daily dosing groups. CONCLUSIONS: SsK12 colonisation was more prevalent with daily dosing; however, colonisation was not maintained when dosing stopped. Both dosing regimens were acceptable to participants. These findings support the use of daily dosing in a future trial to evaluate the efficacy of SsK12 in preventing recurrence of sore throat/tonsillitis. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04297878.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

A narrative systematic review of definitions and diagnostic criteria for disordered eating and eating disorders in type 1 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Type 1 diabetes and disordered eating (T1DE) affects 8-37.1% of adults and is associated with high rates of morbidity and mortality. The absence of a standardised case definition of T1DE and its severity hinders effective screening, diagnosis and treatment. This systematic review aimed to (1) synthesise existing case definitions and diagnostic criteria for T1DE in adults and (2) identify key characteristics to inform consensus for future diagnostic criteria. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Eligible studies involved adults (≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes assessing disordered eating; paediatric studies, mixed samples without disaggregated data, non-empirical designs and non-English publications were excluded. PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO were searched up to November 2025 for peer-reviewed studies involving adults with T1DE. Qualitative and quantitative data on definitions, diagnostic criteria and assessment tools were extracted. Study quality was appraised using a modified Graphical Appraisal Tool for Epidemiological studies (GATE) checklist. Due to heterogeneity of data, a narrative synthesis of findings was performed to describe current definitions of T1DE. RESULTS: Sixty-one studies met the inclusion criteria, with a pooled sample of 111,208 participants (76% women) from over 22 countries. T1DE was defined using a heterogeneous array of terms, diagnostic frameworks and assessment tools (29 distinct methods). The Diabetes Eating Problem Survey-Revised (DEPS-R) was the most used questionnaire, but many studies relied on criteria adapted from general eating disorder classifications or generic questionnaires. Approximately three-quarters of the studies assessed insulin omission behaviours, but the operationalisation of the cognitions for insulin omission varied widely. Beyond physiological markers such as HbA1c and BMI, studies explored various diabetes-related and psychological constructs, although often considering diabetes and disordered eating separately rather than as an integrated condition. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: This systematic review highlights the lack of a unified, evidence-based definition of T1DE, resulting in inconsistent screening, diagnostic and reporting practices. Establishing clear, consistent, evidence-based diagnostic criteria and screening questionnaires for T1DE is critical to improving early detection and developing targeted interventions. These findings provide a foundation for refining T1DE definitions as a stepping stone to an international consensus definition. STUDY REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration no. CRD420250223622 FUNDING: King's College London and King's College Hospital through the KMRT KCH Joint Research Committee studentship. This work was also conducted as part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR; CS-2017-17-023)-funded STEADY project (Safe management of people with Type 1 diabetes and EAting Disorders studY). NZ's salary was part-funded by the NIHR via the NIHR Clinician Scientist award to MS; JT and KI are part-funded by the NIHR Mental Health Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and King's College London. MS was funded through her NIHR Clinician Scientist Fellowship (CS-2017-17-023).

Humans↗

PubMed2026

High-Dose Intravenous Vitamin C and Mortality and Organ Dysfunction in Severe Burn Injury: The VICTORY Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: Severe burn injury triggers systemic inflammation that can lead to multiple organ dysfunctions and death. High-dose intravenous vitamin C has been proposed to mitigate these effects, but strong evidence in patients with burn injury is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of high-dose intravenous vitamin C in patients with severe burn injury. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial conducted across 24 burn centers in North, Central, and South America; Europe; and Asia. Adults (≥18 years) with deep second- and/or third-degree burns covering 20% or more of total body surface area and requiring skin grafting were enrolled between August 18, 2020, and September 12, 2025. Final follow-up was completed in March 2026. The trial was stopped early after the first prespecified interim analysis for futility/harm. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous vitamin C (50 mg/kg every 6 hours for 96 hours) or matched placebo. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of 28-day mortality and persistent organ dysfunction (defined as dependence on mechanical ventilation, kidney replacement therapy, or vasopressor/inotrope support at day 28). The main secondary outcome was time to discharge alive from hospital within 90 days. RESULTS: Among 238 patients enrolled (mean age, 48.9 [SD, 19.1] years; 79% male; mean total body surface area, 37.0% [SD, 14.6%]), 120 were assigned to vitamin C and 118 to placebo. The primary composite outcome occurred in 49 patients (40.8%) in the vitamin C group and 35 patients (29.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted risk ratio [RR], 1.28 [95% CI, 0.99-1.65]; P = .06), crossing the prespecified futility/harm threshold and prompting early trial termination. Time to discharge alive from hospital within 90 days was not improved (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.85 [95% CI, 0.62-1.16]; P = .31). Twenty-eight-day mortality was higher in the vitamin C group (15.0% vs 7.6%; adjusted RR, 1.96 [95% CI, 1.32-2.90]; P = .001), as was hospital mortality (23.3% vs 16.1%; adjusted RR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.03-2.00]; P = .03). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with severe burn injury, high-dose intravenous vitamin C did not reduce 28-day mortality and persistent organ dysfunction and is possibly harmful. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04138394.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

Acute mild cold exposure with shivering reduces 24 h glucose levels in individuals with type 2 diabetes but not prediabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Repeated cold exposure with shivering has been proposed as a potential strategy to enhance glucose metabolism by increasing energy expenditure and substrate utilisation. However, acute effects/benefits of cold-induced shivering on glucose homeostasis in metabolically compromised individuals are unknown. Here, we aimed to determine whether cold exposure at two different intensities improves 24 h glucose homeostasis in individuals with prediabetes and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In a randomised crossover trial conducted in the South Limburg/Maastricht region of the Netherlands, men and postmenopausal women with prediabetes (n=12) and stable type 2 diabetes (n=12), aged 40-75 years, body mass index ≥27 and ≤35 kg/m2, non-smoking and sedentary, underwent two whole-body cold exposure sessions using a water-perfused suit. Session order was randomised using an online randomisation tool (randomizer.org); participants were masked to the cold exposure intensity received, but investigators were not. Sessions were designed to elicit ~1.5-fold (mild, 15°C) and ~2.5-fold (moderate, 4°C) increases in resting metabolic rate (RMR). Continuous glucose monitoring assessed interstitial glucose concentrations over 24 h periods before and after each intervention, with controlled diet and activity. Shivering was confirmed via indirect calorimetry and electromyography. RESULTS: In both study groups and periods, RMR increased significantly vs baseline (p<0.001 for all). In prediabetes, the increase in the final 1 h of cold was 1.53 × RMR in mild and 1.94 × RMR in moderate cold. In type 2 diabetes, the increase was 1.57 × RMR and 2.09 × RMR in the final 1 h of mild and moderate cold, respectively. In prediabetes, neither mild nor moderate cold exposure altered mean 24 h glucose levels. In contrast, after mild cold exposure the type 2 diabetes group exhibited a significant reduction in mean 24 h glucose levels (-0.6 ± 0.5 mmol/l, p=0.003) and fasting glucose (-0.6 ± 0.8 mmol/l, p=0.019), as well as an increase in time in normal range (+8.8 ± 10.3%, p=0.013) and reduced time in hyperglycaemia (-10.9 ± 12.9%, p=0.014). Moderate cold did not significantly affect any of the glucose outcomes in type 2 diabetes. Baseline fasting glucose, age and ALT levels were predictors of the glucose-lowering response, suggesting greater benefits in individuals who have higher baseline glucose levels, are younger and/or have more optimal liver health, i.e. lower ALT. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Acute mild cold exposure with shivering reduced 24 h glucose levels in individuals with type 2 diabetes. No changes were observed in prediabetes. The observed effects appear to depend on baseline metabolic status rather than acute substrate utilisation during cold exposure. These findings support the potential of cold exposure as an adjunct non-pharmacological therapy for type 2 diabetes, although further mechanistic studies and validation in larger cohorts are warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05576025 FUNDING: Dutch Organisation for Knowledge and Innovation in Health, Healthcare and Well-being (ZonMw): 09120012010062.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

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

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

Adult↗

PubMed2026

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

Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to mental health services in England (the ODDESSI Trial): a multisite cluster-randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Open Dialogue is a person-centred, transdiagnostic model of mental health care that emphasises continuity, therapeutic relationships, and collaboration with the service user's social network. Open Dialogue is a service-wide approach to care involving network meetings with the service user, members of their social network, and usually two practitioners who support the network throughout the duration of care. In this cluster-randomised trial, we aimed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of Open Dialogue versus treatment as usual for adults presenting in crisis to community mental health services in England. METHODS: This multicentre, parallel two-arm, cluster-randomised, controlled superiority trial was conducted in mental health services in five National Health Service trusts in London and the South of England. Clusters were defined at the level of primary care practices within service catchment areas. Participants were adults aged 18 years or older presenting in crisis to mental health services and registered with a practice within trial clusters. Randomisation was done at the cluster level (1:1), stratified by catchment area, and balanced on average general practice (GP) list size and Index of Multiple Deprivation (2015). The chief investigator, senior statistician, and assessors of the primary outcome were masked in the study. Participants either received Open Dialogue or treatment as usual, which refers to the functional team model currently implemented throughout English mental health services. The primary outcome was time (days) to first relapse following initial recovery from the index crisis censored at the end of the 2-year follow-up period. Participant-reported secondary outcomes were EuroQol Visual Analogue Scale, Social Provisions Scale, Lubben Social Network Scale, Questionnaire about the Process of Recovery, and the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire, measured at five timepoints over 2 years, and clinical measures were extracted from electronic health records. People with relevant lived experience were involved in the design and execution of the study. Fidelity to the model of care in Open Dialogue and treatment as usual, and adherence to the delivery of Open Dialogue, were measured prior to each site starting participant recruitment, then every 6 months thereafter until the final participant follow-up in that site. The trial was retrospectively registered (ISRCTN52653325) and is complete. FINDINGS: 185 general practices associated with six mental health Trusts across England were identified for screening. 105 practices were excluded, and 80 were included in cluster formation, forming 32 clusters that were randomly assigned (16 to treatment as usual and 16 to the Open Dialogue intervention). One mental health trust (two clusters) withdrew, resulting in five mental health trusts (30 clusters) participating in the trial. Between June 25, 2019, and Dec 9, 2021, 494 participants (266 [54%] female gender, 221 [45%] male gender, 341 [69%] White British) with a mean age of 38·1 years (SD 13·4) provided consent for study inclusion (223 in the treatment as usual group and 271 in the Open Dialogue group). Of these, 174 (78%) in the treatment as usual group and 225 (83%) in the Open Dialogue group recovered and had data enabling relapse determination; there was no significant difference between groups on the primary outcome of time to relapse following initial recovery (marginal hazard ratio 0·95 [95% CI 0·67-1·32]). For secondary outcomes, Open Dialogue was associated with significantly lower probabilities of psychiatric inpatient admission and re-referral to crisis care or secondary mental health services, and with improvements in self-rated recovery, health-related quality of life, and satisfaction with services. There were no significant differences in social network quality or size. There were 386 serious adverse events (281 in the treatment as usual group and 105 in the Open Dialogue group); 376 (97%) were deemed to be unrelated to the intervention. INTERPRETATION: Open Dialogue did not reduce time to first relapse compared with treatment as usual, the primary outcome, but it reduced acute inpatient bed use, improved service user reported outcomes and experience, and there were no significant safety concerns. Further investigation is required to determine whether Open Dialogue can enhance the effectiveness and acceptability of crisis care and continuing care in community mental health services. FUNDING: National Institute for Health Research.

Humans↗

PubMed2026

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 34·7 months (IQR 30·1-36·8). Median progression-free survival was 28·4 months (95% CI 5·2-not estimable) in the DA-EPOCH-R group (n=30) and 7·7 months (95% CI 4·7-NE) in the DA-EPOCH-R plus venetoclax group (n=36; hazard ratio [HR] 1·13, 95% CI 0·53-2·37; p=0·75). 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 2·49, 95% CI 1·03-6·04; p=0·038). 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↗

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↗

PubMed2026

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 ≥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 ≥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 10·0 months (IQR 4·6-17·2); median follow-up for progression-free survival was 11·0 months (IQR 4·8-18·4) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 8·3 months (4·1-15·5) for TACE. Median progression-free survival was 13·0 months (95% CI 12·2-16·7) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE versus 9·8 months (8·0-11·4) for TACE (HR 0·70 [95% CI 0·57-0·86]; p=0·0007). At the second data cutoff (Feb 23, 2026) and a median follow-up for overall survival of 24·6 months (IQR 16·5-31·5) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 22·9 months (14·9-30·2) for TACE, median overall survival was 39·5 months (95% CI 34·1-not reached) for STRIDE plus lenvatinib plus TACE and 34·7 months (28·8-not reached) for TACE (HR 0·84 [95% CI 0·65-1·09]; p=0·18). At this data cutoff, median progression-free survival was 12·9 months (95% CI 10·2-15·9) for STRIDE plus TACE and 8·1 months (6·5-10·2) for the first 175 participants randomised to TACE (HR 0·71 [95% CI 0·56-0·91]), with median follow-up of 10·3 months (IQR 4·6-23·7) for STRIDE plus TACE and 7·7 months (3·0-18·5) 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↗