There are about 11304 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Denmark. 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.
The purpose of this trial is to assess the effects of transmyringeal ventilation tubes compared with sham-treatment which do not ventilate the middle ear, on the number of vertigo attacks lasting more than 20 minutes in participants with Menière's disease.
The objective of this single arm, post market, clinical study is to evaluate the performance of Gynecare TVT EXACT® Continence System in women undergoing retropubic mid-urethral sling surgery for Stress Urinary Incontinence (SUI).
The purpose of the study is to assess the safety and performance of the Omega™ LAA (Left Atrial Appendage) Occluder and Omega™ Delivery System in LAA (Left Atrial Appendage) closure for patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (NVAF) and high bleeding risk.
The objective of this post market, clinical registry is to evaluate the performance of the products of the TVT family of products or vaginal vault or uterine prolapse repair (with laparotomic or laparoscopic approach including robotic assisted) using either Gynemesh PS Mesh or Artisyn Mesh in women undergoing surgery for SUI and POP.
The drug that will be investigated in the study is an antibody, GEN3014. Since this is the first study of GEN3014 in humans, the main purpose is to evaluate safety. Besides safety, the study will determine the recommended GEN3014 dose to be tested in a larger group of participants and assess preliminary clinical activity of GEN3014. GEN3014 will be studied in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (also known as RRMM) and other blood cancers. The study consists of 3 parts: 1. The Dose Escalation will test increasing doses of GEN3014 to find a safe dose level to be tested in the other two parts. 2. Expansion Part A will further test the GEN3014 dose determined from the Dose Escalation Part. 3. Expansion Part B will compare intravenous (IV) GEN3014 with the subcutaneous (SC) daratumumab in ex-US countries. Participants will receive either GEN3014 or daratumumab; none will be given placebo. The study duration will be different for the individual participants. Overall, the study may be ongoing up to 5 years after the last participant's first treatment.
Semaglutide is a medicine studied in patients with NASH. Semaglutide is a well-known medicine, which is already used by doctors to treat type 2 diabetes in many countries. Participants will either get semaglutide or a dummy medicine - which treatment participants get is decided by chance. Participants will need to inject themselves with medicine under the skin. Participants will need to do this once a week. The study will last for about 5 years. Participants will have up to 21 clinic visits and 9 phone calls with the clinical staff during the study. Some of the clinic visits may be spread over more than one day. Participants with other chronic liver diseases cannot take part in this study. Women cannot take part in the study if they are pregnant, breast-feeding or plan to become pregnant during the study period.
Physical inactivity is identified as one of the most important modifiable risk factors for chronic diseases, functional loss and disability and reliable assessment tools of physical activity are crucial in both research and clinical settings. Traditionally, physical activity and sedentary behavior have been primarily assessed with questionnaires. Recently, accelerometers have been widely used to measure physical activity, sedentary behavior and sleep patterns in ageing. Still, the diversity of brands and models, various assessment protocols (e.g. anatomic locations, sampling frequency), data processing and outcome measures have posed challenges to the interpretation and comparability of results across studies. Therefore, despite some limitations, questionnaires are still considered an important assessment method, especially in large-scale studies. In order to bridge the differences in the interpretation of data from questionnaires to accelerometers among older adults, there is a need to validate existing physical activity and sedentary behavior questionnaires with energy expenditure in this population. Energy expenditure has been used to "translate" accelerometer output into physiological outcomes. Nevertheless, several issues remain unresolved, including (1) limited calibration studies focusing on older adults; (2) resting metabolic rate and maximum physiological capacity typically decrease with aging, which makes daily activities "more intense" for an older person compared to a younger person; and (3) the same accelerometer metric measured at different body positions may be linked to completely different physiological outcomes. Such diverse physiological impact according to the anatomical placement of accelerometers requires a rigorous harmonization of metrics from the accelerometers with energy expenditure during representative activities at different intensities. The aims of this methodological study focusing on 80+ year-olds are to: 1. develop cut-points from accelerometers at different anatomical positions for different intensities of physical activity based on energy expenditure during semi-standardized daily tasks in the lab. 2. validate accelerometer at different anatomical positions against energy expenditure measured by double-labelled water (DLW) in free-living conditions. 3. validate existing physical activity and sedentary behavior questionnaires against DLW in free-living conditions.
The reason for this study is to see if the study drug, selpercatinib, compared to placebo is effective and safe in delaying cancer return in participants with early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who have already had surgery or radiation. Participants who are assigned to placebo and stop the study drug because their disease comes back or gets worse have the option to potentially crossover to selpercatinib. Participation could last up to three years.
In acute pancreatitis, approximately 20% of the cases result in severe necrotizing pancreatitis which is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Necrotizing pancreatitis is characterized by the development of an acute necrotic collection and as this collection persists beyond 4 weeks, walled off necrosis (WON) encapsulates the collection. To date, this is treated by the step-up approach, which contains percutaneous drainage and minimally invasive video assisted retroperitoneal debridement (VARD) or endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) guided drainage followed by direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN). Different DEN techniques are available for the treatment of WON, however, there is a lack of effective endoscopic instruments to perform DEN. Recently, the first dedicated alternative to conventional DEN has been cleared for use, namely the EndoRotor® Resection System. This device is a powered mechanical debridement device intended for use in endoscopic procedures to resect and remove necrotic debris during DEN for WON. Previous (pilot and feasibility) studies showed promising results in terms of the amount of procedures, adverse events and length of hospital stay. Therefore, aim of this study is to assess the performance of the EndoRotor, as compared to conventional endoscopic techniques, for direct endoscopic necrosectomy (DEN) of walled off necrosis (WON) in a randomized controlled trial.
The ongoing corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is a viral acute respiratory tract infection caused by server acute respiratory syndrom coronavirus typ 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The signs and symptom of SARS-CoV-2 infection vary and most people with COVID-19 experience illness of mild or moderate severity and recover with symptomatic treatment outside of hospital. Studies have found that some people experience lingering/long-lasting symptoms and only a minority of patients were completely free from COVID-19 related symptoms after two months. About one third still had up to two residual symptoms and 55% had three or more. As far as we know no study on lingering symptoms has been published in patients after a mild or moderate infection managed in primary care settings. The aim of this study is to explore the course of disease over a one year period and describe lingering symptoms and their impact on well-being and daily activities in adult non-hospitalized patients with previous established COVID-19 infection.