Clinical trials

Most patients who receive radiation therapy for head and neck cancer develop painful sores in the mouth called oral mucositis. For many of them, these sores are severe and result in debilitating pain. The sores usually start in the third week of radiation and last aboutfive weeks, often continuing for two weeks after treatment ends. Current pain treatments, for instance lidocaine solution, only give short-lasting pain relief. BupiZenge is a lozenge that dissolves slowly in the mouth and contains bupivacaine. Bupivacaine is a long-acting pain-relieving medicine and has been safely used for many years for both children and adults, and its safety profile is well understood. The BupiZenge lozenge is designed to give longer and more reliable pain relief for patients with mucositis in their mouth. This study will check if BupiZenge works better to reduce pain than lidocaine, and if better pain control improves quality of life and reduces the need for strong pain medicines like opioids. The main goal is to see how much mouth pain decreases after taking BupiZenge compared to lidocaine. This is measured by asking the patients to rate their pain score on a scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). This is done at different time-points, from before the dose until three hours after dose on the last day of radiotherapy. The study will include 150 adults, both women and men, aged 18 to 80 years, who have head and neck cancer and are scheduled to receive radiotherapy, with or without chemotherapy. These patients will be randomly assigned to one of the treatment groups. The first is BupiZenge, which is a lozenge containing bupivacaine, which dissolves slowly in the mouth. The second is lidocaine, which is a liquid solution for use in the mouth that you gurgle or swish around in the mouth. The study begins with a combined screening and run-in period that can last up to five weeks. During radiotherapy, patients record their mouth pain each day using a number scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (worst possible pain). If the pain score is at least 4 (moderate pain) and they have developed mucositis in the mouth within 5 weeks, patients are randomly assigned to receive either BupiZenge or Lidocaine. Treatment continues at least until radiotherapy is completed. If the patient has pain and mouth sores, and the treatment is working well, it may continue after radiotherapy ends, but only until the sores heal or for a maximum of six weeks in total, whichever occurs first. After treatment ends, there is a 30-day follow-up period.

The goal of this clinical trial is to learn if Sensory motor arousal regulation treatment (SMART) works better than treatment as usual (TAU) to treat youth 7-17 years with complex trauma histories and self-regulation difficulties. The study also will investigate which patients will benefit more from SMART (treatment effect heterogeneity) and whether therapeutic alliance mediates effect. The main hypotheses the trial aims to answer are: 1. Main effects: The SMART model approach will be more effective than ordinary treatment (control condition), in terms of improvement from therapy starts to 6 and 12 months follow up, for: 1. Regulatory capacities of emotions and bodily states, attention and behavior, and self and social relations 2. Trauma symptoms of re-experiencing, avoidance/ numbness and hyperarousal and sense of threat (core PTSD symptoms) and disturbances in self-organization (affect, self-concept; relations - core complex PTSD symptoms) 3. Internalizing symptoms (somatic complaints, anxiety symptoms and depression symptom severity) and Externalizing symptoms (conduct problems, aggression, inattention, and social problem severity) 4. Psychosocial strengths - prosocial behavior, subjective well-being and impairment in peer relationships, family relationships, and academic/school functioning 2. Exploration of mediation: When comparing SMART and ordinary treatment (TAU), (i) therapeutic alliance is higher in SMART, and (ii) a better treatment effect in SMART is partially mediated by therapeutic alliance 3\. Exploration of treatment effect heterogeneity (moderators): Effects of SMART treatment compared to TAU vary between: patients with low versus high level of self-regulation difficulties (full vs partial Developmental trauma disorder), patients with extensive vs less extensive developmental trauma exposure, adolescents (13-17 years) vs younger children (7-12 years), and patients exposed to trauma early in life vs in their teens At each site, eligible participants are randomized to SMART or ordinary treatment/ TAU. Investigators acquire study data at baseline and outcome data at follow up after 6 and 12 months, and measure therapeutic alliance twice during the treatment process.

Multiple myeloma is a cancer of the plasma cells in the bone marrow. The main aim of this study is to learn how well the Immune Globulin Infusion (human), 10 percentage (%) (IGI, 10%) can help prevent infections in participants with multiple myeloma receiving B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA) x cluster of differentiation 3 (CD3) directed bispecific antibody therapy. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of two groups: 1. Primary infection prevention group: They will receive IGI, 10% for 12 months. 2. Secondary infection prevention group: They will only receive IGI, 10% if they develop a serious infection during the 12 months study period. During the study, participants will visit their study clinic 15 times (for 4-week dosing interval) or 19 times (for 3-week dosing interval) and their total participation duration will be up to 14 months (including screening period approximately 8 weeks).

The purpose of this study is to compare how well Rina-S (GEN1184) works compared to treatment of physician's choice (paclitaxel or doxorubicin) that are considered standard medical care for the treatment of recurrent or progressive endometrial cancer (EC) following prior therapy. There is an equal (50:50) chance of getting either Rina-S or a chemotherapy agent as treatment in this study. The study duration will be approximately 3 years. The treatment duration will be different for every participant, but an average of 4 to 6 months is expected. All participants will receive active drug; no one will be given placebo. Participation in the study will require visits to the study site(s).

The purpose of this study is to compare whether the FDA and Health Canada approved microUS is as effective as the currently used option (MRI) for imaging the prostate gland. Participants will be randomized into two groups to compare the imaging results of the current standard of care MRI and the new microUS. The study is looking to identify the most effective imaging modality to help guide whether you progress to have a prostate biopsy.

This is a Phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled multicenter study to investigate outcomes with elecoglipron compared with placebo in participants with CKD with and without T2DM who are on background SGLT2i (dapagliflozin) as GDMT and other SoC treatments for CKD.

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of Pumitamig versus Pembrolizumab in participants with previously untreated advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer and PD-L1 ≥ 50%.

PODOMOUNT-pFSGS This study is open to adults and adolescents with a kidney condition called focal segmental glomerulosclerosis (FSGS). The purpose of this study is to find out whether a medicine called BI 764198 helps people with FSGS. Participants are put into 2 groups randomly, which means by chance. Every participant has an equal chance of being in each group. One group takes BI 764198 tablets, and the other group takes placebo tablets. Placebo tablets look like BI 764198 tablets but do not contain any medicine. Participants take a tablet once a day for up to 2 years. All participants also continue their standard medication for FSGS. Participants are in the study for up to 2 years. During this time, they visit the study site about every 3 months. Participants regularly collect urine samples. This is done to check their kidneys. The results are compared between the two groups to see whether the treatment works. The doctors also regularly check participants' health and take note of any unwanted effects.

The purpose of this study is to find out if a new drug, called IDRX-42 (also known as GSK6042981), is effective in treating adults with a type of cancer called Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) when compared to another drug named sunitinib. The study will see if IDRX-42 works well and is safe for participants whose GIST has spread or cannot be surgically removed, and who have already taken the drug imatinib. Participants whose disease worsens after receiving sunitinib in this study may cross over to receive GSK6042981, at investigator's discretion and if additional eligibility criteria are met.

This is a clinical study that has three parts. It is testing a potential new medicine called Sofetabart Mipitecan (Sofe-M) for people with certain types of ovarian, peritoneal, and fallopian tube cancers. Part A enrolls participants with platinum-resistant cancer, meaning their disease progressed during or within six months of platinum-based chemotherapy. Parts B and C enroll participants with platinum-sensitive cancer, whose disease responded and remained controlled for at least six months after completing platinum treatment. The researchers want to find out if Sofe-M works better than the standard treatments that doctors use now and to better understand how safe it is. Each participant's time in the study will depend on how they respond to the treatment.

The main purpose of the SYNERGY-OUTCOMES study is to find out whether retatrutide and tirzepatide can prevent major adverse liver outcomes (MALO) in people with high-risk metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD). The study will enroll adults who have MASLD based on non-invasive tests (NITs), which indicate they are more likely to develop MALO. Participants will be randomly assigned within a Master Protocol to receive either retatrutide (N1T-MC-RT01), tirzepatide (N1T-MC-TZ01) or placebo. The trial plans to enroll about 4,500 adults and will run for approximately 224 weeks. Participants may have up to approximately 25 to 30 clinic visits throughout the study to monitor their health, complete study procedures, and assess liver function and disease progression. Once the study is complete, eligible participants may participate in an optional 2-year extension study, in which all participants will receive either retatrutide or tirzepatide, even if they received placebo in the main study.

The main purpose of this study is to assess if olomorasib in combination with pembrolizumab is more effective than the pembrolizumab and placebo combination in part A in participants with resected KRAS G12C-mutant NSCLC and to assess if olomorasib in combination with durvalumab is more effective than the durvalumab and placebo combination in part B in participants with unresectable KRAS G12C-mutant non-small cell lung cancer. The study may last up to 3 years for each participant.

Adults 18 years of age and older or above legal age with lung fibrosis related to systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease can participate in this study. People can only take part if they show no improvement in lung function after standard treatment with immunosuppressant medicine. The main purpose of this study is to find out how a medicine called nerandomilast affects the lungs in people with systemic autoimmune rheumatic disease. Participants are put into 2 groups randomly, which means by chance. One group takes nerandomilast tablets and the other group takes placebo tablets. Placebo tablets look like nerandomilast tablets but do not contain any medicine. Participants take a tablet 2 times a day for at least 26 weeks and up to 1 year. Participants continue immunosuppressant treatment for their underlying rheumatic disease. Participants are in the study for about 7.5 to 13 months depending on when they join the study. During this time, they visit the study site about 9 to 10 times. At study visits, participants have lung function tests. At select visits, chest imaging is performed. Participants fill in questionnaires about their symptoms and quality of life. The results between the 2 groups are compared to see whether the treatment works. The doctors also regularly check participants' health and take note of any unwanted effects.

Given the number of anticipated durvalumab-based treatment launches in the hepatobiliary cancer space over the next 3 years, there is a need to capture contemporary real-world data across these indications. LIVER-R is a multi-country, multi-center, observational study of patients with a confirmed diagnosis of hepatobiliary cancer treated with or without a durvalumab-based regimen as part of routine clinical practice or early access program (EAP). The study design will include primary and secondary data collection. The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of regimens (durvalumab-based or otherwise) in real-world settings as measured by real-world overall survival. Other endpoints include demographics, clinical characteristics, clinically significant events of interest, treatment patterns, concomitant medications, treatment provider characteristics, and other real-world clinical endpoints (such as duration of treatment, progression-free survival, time to treatment progression, time to next treatment, time to treatment discontinuation, recurrence-free survival, and time to treatment recurrence).

The purpose of this study is to assess if adding LY3537982 (olomorasib) in combination with standard of care anti-cancer drugs is more effective than standard of care in participants with untreated advanced NSCLC. NSCLC must have a change in a gene called KRAS G12C. Study participation, including follow-up, could last up to 3 years, depending on how you and your lung cancer are doing.

This open-label extension study will provide post-trial access to pelacarsen (TQJ230) to participants who have successfully completed the double-blind parent study (CTQJ230A12301).

This study is testing different blood-thinning treatment strategies for people who have had a heart attack and were successfully treated with a coronary stent procedure (PCI). All strategies tested are already approved for this condition and used inversally. This study will define which of the approved strategies is the best one. After PCI, patients usually receive two antiplatelet medicines for up to 12 months to help prevent another heart attack or stroke, but this treatment can also increase bleeding risk. This study will compare a shorter course of dual antiplatelet therapy followed by one antiplatelet medicine alone versus the standard 12-month course. In addition, the study will compare two commonly used antiplatelet drugs, prasugrel and ticagrelor. The goal is to find out which strategy best prevents death, heart attack, or stroke while minimizing serious bleeding. This study is not testing any new intervention, rather comparing approved drugs and approved durations of use.

This study is an intervention domain of the Musculoskeletal Adaptive Platform Trial. The primary goal of this pragmatic, randomized, open-label, comparative effectiveness trial is to evaluate if arthroplasty is superior to internal fixation when used to treat minimally displaced femoral neck fractures in older adults ≥60 years old. We hypothesize that arthroplasty will reduce death, preserve ambulation, increase days alive and out of hospital, and improve health status compared to internal fixation within 4 months and 12 months from randomization.

PEDAL is a group-based intervention for patients with bipolar disorder that builds on the traditional group psychoeducational program (GPP) by adding digital tools and specific strategies to help manage rapid fluctuations between affective states, known as affective lability. The program's goal is to help patients learn and develop new ways to better manage their condition, with particular attention to affective lability and other difficulties with affect regulation- challenges which are not typically addressed in current treatments. The PEDAL trial will run at five clinical sites around Oslo and Vestre Viken, aiming to recruit 120 participants with bipolar disorder. The program combines existing group sessions from GPP with new components: additional group sessions focusing on strategies for improving affect regulation such as mindfulness and distress tolerance, an online platform with all course materials including instructional videos and other resources, and an app-based mood diary. This framework maintains the benefits of regular group meetings while adding digital support tools to make the intervention more personalized and accessible. The main aim of PEDAL is to see if the new program reduces affective lability more effectively than GPP (treatment-as-usual; TAU), and both intervention groups will be compared on the level of affective lability before and after the intervention. Several secondary outcomes like mood symptoms, suicidal thoughts, perceived stress, and quality of life will also be assessed. In terms of study design, all study sites will run the PEDAL and TAU groups in parallel, and participants will be randomly assigned to either PEDAL or TAU. To qualify for the study, participants must be aged 18-65, diagnosed with bipolar disorder, able to participate in a group intervention, capable of providing informed consent, and have a smartphone or computer. People who have previously completed group psychoeducation, who are unable to complete the study period due to pregnancy or other factors, or those who cannot use the required technology are excluded. In summary, PEDAL is a novel study that modernizes the existing group psychoeducational program for bipolar disorder by targeting affective lability through skills training and digital tools, while also evaluating its reception and effects in a controlled clinical trial.

The purpose of this study is to find out if baricitinib can preserve beta-cell function in participants newly diagnosed with type 1 diabetes. Participation in the study will last about 60 weeks.

The purpose of this study is to find out if baricitinib can delay the onset of clinical type 1 diabetes (T1D) in people who are at high risk to develop T1D. Participation in the study will last up to approximately 5 years.

Colorectal cancer (CRC), the third most diagnosed cancer and second most common cause of cancer death. CRCs develop from precursors like adenomas (about 70% of CRCs) or serrated lesions (SSLs) (about 25-30% of CRCs). Colonoscopy is the cornerstone in CRC screening, in screening programmes often as a work-up examination after a positive primary screening test such as faecal immunochemical test (FIT). Norway and Sweden have recently launched a nationwide faecal haemoglobin CRC screening programmes. Recently, both a Dutch and an Austrian study showed that SSL detection rate (SSLDR) is inversely correlated to CRC at follow-up. Consequently, improved SSLDR can reduce the risk of post-colonoscopy CRC. SSLs are typically located in the right colon. They are flat, with indistinctive boarders, and consequently easily missed or incompletely resected. A Norwegian study showed incomplete resection of 40% of proximal SSLs. The prevalence of SSLs is higher in women than in men, with women being on a threefold risk of developing CRC from SSLs. It seems like post-colonoscopy CRC more often is caused by SSLs than by adenomas. Total underwater colonoscopy (TUC) is a technique replacing conventional CO2 insufflation by water infusion to distend the lumen and visualise the mucosa during withdrawal of the colonoscope and simultaneously removal of water. There are several reasons to advocate TUC: 1. SSLs will be more visible as they "float" on the submucosa and contract into the lumen, while full distension by gas stretches the mucosa, making detection of flat lesions more difficult. 2. Water works like a magnifying lens, making detection and detailed characterisation of lesions easier. 3. uEMR is eased. 4. Improved bowel cleansing The goal of this clinical trial is to compare colonoscopy outcomes for standard gas (CO2) insufflation and TUC during withdrawal in patients participating in colonoscopy in the Norwegian and Swedish colorectal cancer screening programme after a positive fecal immunochemical test. The overarching research questions of the present trial is whether colonoscopy outcomes are improved when CO2 insufflation is replaced by TUC during withdrawal and whether the new technique reduces the ecological footprint of the colonoscopy examination. The project has five main hypotheses: 1. TUC is superior to the standard approach (CO2 withdrawal) regarding detection of proximal SSLs. 2. TUC increases the rate of complete resection of lesions \>= 10mm. 3. TUC reduces the rate of painful colonoscopies and vasovagal reactions. 4. TUC reduces the health care costs by reduced use of single use accessories and reduced number of redundant colonoscopies to obtain polypfree colon. 5. TUC reduces the carbon footprint by reduced use of single use accessories. If TUC is superior to gas insufflation, the technique may be implemented rapidly since the technique is easy to learn. This study will increase endoscopy competence at participating centres. The centres are involved in national colonoscopy training programs, so the technique will quickly be passed on to other hospitals and screening centres. The trial can be linked to three of the Global Goals: * Good health and well-being: The increased detection and improved complete removal of sessile serrated lesions can subsequently decrease the risk of CRC and CRC mortality during follow-up. TUC will probably reduce the rate of painful procedures and vasovagal reactions and thus increase the acceptance of a screening programme. Consequently, the project can contribute significantly to improve screening effectiveness in Norway and Sweden, particularly in women (women have a higher risk for SSLs and a higher risk of colorectal cancer developing from this type of precursor). * Gender equality: Women have a similar lifetime risk for CRC as men but less benefit of screening regardless of whether they are screened by sigmoidoscopy, FIT or colonoscopy. The reason is probably missed sessile serrated lesions in the proximal colon. If TUC improves SSLDR and complete lesion resection, this may lead to an equal benefit from CRC screening for women and men. Women have also a higher risk of discomfort and pain during colonoscopy than men. It has been shown that women prefer non-invasive screening modalities, potentially to avoid pain during colonoscopy, even if colonoscopy may be the most beneficial screening method for women. If TUC reduces the rate of painful colonoscopies, it can reduce women's barriers to attend screening. * Responsible consumption and production: The TUC technique will also reduce the ecological footprint of colonoscopy activity due to reduced consumption of single use accessories and reduced number of colonoscopies to achieve polyp free colon. Furthermore, the cost for the health care system will be substantially reduced.

This study will evaluate mechanisms of resistance to anti-breast cancer therapies in tumor and blood samples from participants with human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2) positive, hormone receptor (HR) positive or triple negative breast cancer.

A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase III Study of Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy With Venetoclax in Adult Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia or Myelodysplastic Syndrome With Excess Blasts-2

This is a prospective study for the long-term follow-up (LTFU) of safety and efficacy for all pediatric and adult participants exposed to Gene-modified (GM) T-cell therapy participating in a previous Celgene sponsored or Celgene alliance partner sponsored study. Participants who received at least one infusion of GM T cells will be asked to enroll in this LTFU protocol upon either premature discontinuation from, or completion of the prior parent treatment protocol.