There are about 10460 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Australia. The country of the clinical trial is determined by the location of where the clinical research is being studied. Most studies are often held in multiple locations & countries.
There is sparse evidence on the effectiveness of first-line treatment in patients with femoroacetabular impingement syndrome (FAIS) regarding clinical- and cost-effectiveness. The goal of this randomized controlled trial is to compare the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a supervised strength exercise intervention to usual first-line care in patients with FAIS. The main hypothesis it aims to investigate are: 1. 6-months of supervised strength exercise intervention is superior (i.e., at least 6 points, on a scale from 0-100) to usual care in improving hip related quality of life in patients with FAIS at the end of intervention. 2. 6-months of supervised strength exercise intervention is cost-effective compared to usual first-line care at 12-month follow-up in patients with FAIS. 3. High exercise adherence and dosage will be superior to low exercise adherence and dosage in mediating clinical effectiveness in patients with FAIS.
The purpose of the study is to evaluate safety and tolerability of the combination of cevostamab plus elranatamab and also determine the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) for the study treatment. The study consists of a safety lead-in stage, and an expansion stage.
This study aims to explore the safety and preliminary efficacy of a response-guided dose titration of KER-047 in the treatment of functional IDA (Iron deficiency anemia) in MDS (Myelodysplastic syndrome), MF(Myelofibrosis), and MDS/MPN (Myeloproliferative neoplasm) overlap syndromes.
The study will aim to find out if the drug andexanet alfa is safe and effective in preventing major bleeding during urgent surgery or invasive procedures. The study will compare the use of andexanet alfa to the usual care given at the study center.
Depression is a major psychiatric illness associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is the most effective treatment for depression and arguably the safest. However, a sizable proportion of patients (20%-30%) do not get well with ECT. Typically, ECT is given as a course extending over weeks and then discontinued. Approximately 50% of patients become unwell again in one year after the completion of ECT even when they use antidepressant medications. Moreover, ECT brings recovery after a series of treatment sessions, usually with a range of 6-20. Each ECT session poses logistic issues. Lithium has robust antidepressant effect when used with antidepressant medications. A combination of lithium and ECT has been studied previously in mania and found to be safe at a lithium level in the human body below 0.6 mEq/L. There is a gap in the literature about the use of lithium and ECT combination in depression. This pilot study aims to investigate the feasibility and safety of conducting a randomized controlled trial comparing lithium and ECT against placebo and ECT. Participants will have either placebo and ECT or lithium ECT at an equal probability. They will be approached for an expression of interest, invited to take part in a consenting session, screened for the eligibility for the study, and assessed for the severity of depression, and cognitive function and then for the improvement in depression. Lithium blood level will be monitored five days after commencement of lithium and each dose change. Participants will be assessed for adverse reactions after each ECT using a formal adverse monitoring report form. Recruitment numbers, trial retention and completion rates and adverse events will be reported.
This is a phase 1/2 multicenter, open-label, first-in-human study of IBI130. It includes a phase 1 dose escalation and expansion section to identify MTD/RP2D of IBI130, plan to enroll 20~182 subjects,and a phase 2 to explore efficacy, safety and tolerability of IBI130 at RP2D in specified types of solid tumor.Approximately 150 evaluable subjects will be enrolled for phase 2.
This study aims to investigate the treatment preferences of patients with Neuroendocrine Tumors (NETS) and nurses who are involved in the care of individuals with NETs. NETs are a type of abnormal growth that can develop in various parts of the body, such as the lungs, pancreas, gastrointestinal tract, or other organs. NETs originate from specialized cells called neuroendocrine cells, which are responsible for producing hormones in our bodies. The study focuses on hypothetical preferences regarding the use of two different type of devices for administering Somatostatin analogues (SSAs), which could be used in the treatment of NETs. SSAs work by imitating the actions of a hormone called somatostatin that naturally exists in our bodies. These treatment help to control the symptoms of NETs by blocking the release of hormones from the tumor cells. The devices under consideration are a motorized injector versus a manual injector. Participants in the study will be asked to take part in: 1. An interview based on a draft survey: 60-minute interview over videocall, to examine participants understanding of the online survey; or 2. Final online survey: 30-minute online survey. This involves presenting patients and nurses with different treatment options and asking them to choose their preferred option. By analysing the choices made by participants, researchers can understand which attributes of the injector devices are most important to patients and nurses. Individual participation is limited to the interview based on a draft survey (60 minutes) or the final online survey (30 minutes). No further participation is required beyond this.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the immunogenicity, safety, and reactogenicity of the RSVPreF3 OA investigational vaccine in an immunocompromised (lung and renal transplant recipients) population and assess whether a second dose of the vaccine increases the immune response.
The primary objective of this study is to compare progression-free survival (PFS) in participants who receive sotorasib with platinum doublet chemotherapy versus participants who receive pembrolizumab with platinum doublet chemotherapy.
This is a phase 1b multi-center, open-label study of HMBD-001 with or without chemotherapy in participants with advanced solid tumors harboring NRG1 gene fusions or selected HER3 mutations.