There are about 5241 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Hungary. 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 the study is to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and clinical efficacy of PN-943 450 mg twice daily [BID] and PN-943 150 mg BID, compared with placebo BID, in subjects with moderate to severe active Ulcerative Colitis (UC).
The primary objective is to assess the efficacy of nemolizumab (CD14152) compared to placebo in participants greater than or equal to (>=) 18 years of age with prurigo nodularis (PN) after a 16 week treatment period.
Primary Objective: To demonstrate the non-inferiority of the seroprotection rate (serum bactericidal assay using human complement [hSBA] titer greater than or equal to [>=] 1:8) to meningococcal serogroups A, C, W, and Y following the administration of a single dose of Meningococcal Polysaccharide (Serogroups A, C, Y, and W) Tetanus Toxoid Conjugate vaccine (MenACYW Conjugate vaccine) (Group 1) compared to a single dose of Nimenrix® (Group 2). Secondary Objective: To describe: - the antibody response of meningococcal serogroups A, C, W, and Y measured by hSBA, before and 1 month following meningococcal vaccination administered alone (Groups 1 and 2) or concomitantly with 9-valent human papilloma virus (9vHPV) and tetanus, diphtheria, and acellular pertussis - inactivated polio vaccine [adsorbed, reduced antigen(s) content] (Tdap-IPV) vaccines (Group 3). - the antibody response of meningococcal serogroup C measured by hSBA and serum bactericidal assay using baby rabbit complement (rSBA), before vaccination and at Day 31 after vaccination with MenACYW Conjugate vaccine or Nimenrix® (Groups 1 and 2) according to MenC primed status. - the antibody response against antigens of 9vHPV and Tdap-IPV vaccines, before and 1 month following vaccination. - the safety profile in each group after each and any vaccination.
The purpose of the study is to collect information on disease characteristics from adult patients diagnosed with fatty acid oxidation disorders (FAOD).
Age-related macular degeneration (AMD) is a leading cause of vision loss in adults. Abnormal blood vessels grow under the macula at the back of the eye, and also leak blood and fluid, which damages and scars the macula, affecting vision. The current standard of care for patients with neovascular (exudative / wet) AMD is anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (anti-VEGF) therapy, which prevents or slows down the growth of the abnormal blood vessels. SCD411 is being developed as a biosimilar to the reference product Eylea® (aflibercept), an anti-VEGF drug. The study aims to prove equivalence of SCD411 to Eylea in adults with wet AMD, and will look at safety, tolerance, effectiveness, immune response and the movement of the drug through the body.
Treatment: A: Slower Loading Group (SLD): 30.000 IU cholecalciferol once weekly for ten weeks, followed by 30.000 IU cholecalciferol every two weeks for four weeks. B: Moderate Loading Dose group (MLD): 30.000 IU cholecalciferol twice weekly for five weeks, followed by 30.000 IU cholecalciferol every two weeks for four weeks. Every patients will receive calcium-citrate supplementation if average daily calcium intake does not reach the recommended daily amount. Setting: two-arms, controlled, randomised, comparative open-label, multicentric clinical trial aimed to assess the comparative efficacy on 25(OH)D elevation and on safety of the two loading dose schedules of 30.000 IU Vitamin D3 oral tablets (administered as "Moderate Loading Dose"or "Slower Loading Dose") combined with an follow-up maintenance period of biweekly administration. The comparative assessment is based on the elevation of 25(OH)D levels due to treatment efficacy from baseline and by the end of the maintenance (biweekly 30.000 IU) period for each treatment groups, and also the ratio of patients in target range (30-50 ng/ml) in order to evaluate the most beneficial "loading dose" schedule. Upon the serum 25(OH)D levels are exceeded the 55ng/ml limits by the end of the loading period the trial subjects should continue with the standard maintenance dose of vitamin D3 for the remaining four weeks of the study. The evaluation of the comparative safety will be done also by controlling the serum and the urinary calcium levels and the registration of adverse drug reaction. The primary objective is to assess the efficacy of the orally administered loading dose schedules of vitamin D3 in deficient patients. Efficacy is measured as the elevation of 25(OH)D levels compared to baseline. Rationale: Oral vitamin D3 is the treatment of choice in vitamin D deficiency. The UK NOS guideline recommended where rapid correction of vitamin D deficiency is required, such as in patients with symptomatic disease or about to start treatment with a potent antiresorptive agent, the recommended treatment regimen is based on fixed loading doses followed by regular maintenance therapy. The loading dose regimen to provide a total of approximately 300,000 IU vitamin D, given either as separate weekly or daily doses over 6 to 10 weeks followed by a maintenance therapy comprising vitamin D in doses equivalent to 800-2000 IU daily in general or up to 4,000 IU daily), given either daily or intermittently at higher doses. (NOS guidelines 2014). Recent research on vitamin D and the widening range of therapeutic applications available for cholecalciferol, which can be classified as both a vitamin and a pro-hormone. Additionally, it was now realized that the Food and Nutrition Board's previously defined Upper Limit (UL) for safe intake at 2,000 IU/day was set far too low and that the physiologic requirement for vitamin D in adults may be as high as 5,000 IU/day, which is less than half of the >10,000 IU that can be produced endogenously with full-body sun exposure. In a recent study showed that the safety of doses over 2000 IU/day-4000 IU/day for 3 months resulting in a ~360,000 UI cumulative dose. According to the study results, for the majority of the patients the 4000 IU/day (360,000 UI cumulative dose) was needed to achieve a 25(OH)D serum concentration above 75nmol/L (30 ng/mL), which is otherwise set as the target value by Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline (Holick 2011b). Another study (Verussio et al 2014) cited shows the safety and efficacy of 50.000 IU/week for 8 weeks (400,000 UI cumulative dose for 8 weeks), followed by 25,000 IU twice a month which was more effective in raising the 25(OH)D level to the target range (of >30 ng/L) than 25,000 IU twice a month (50,000 IU/ month). In the latter group only 40% of the patients reached the target 25(OH)D levels at 6 months, compared to the 72% in the first group. The study supports efficacy of dosing and safety of the treatment of vitamin D deficiency a 50,000 IU /week loading dose scheme with a 8 weeks cumulative dose of >400,000 UI.
Corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is caused by SARS-CoV-2, a plus-sense single-stranded RNA virus. After an incubation period, which typically lasts for 5-6 days, COVID-19 patients present with a mild illness that lasts for a few days. Common symptoms are reminiscent of the flu, and include fever, dry cough and dyspnea. A large percentage of patients resolve the infection whereas others progress onto adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) which impedes gas exchange between the alveolar space and the bloodstream and creates the need for assisted respiration. The objective of this study is to investigate the safety and efficacy of CARDIO supplementation in the recovery of those with COVID-19 infection following the guidance from public health by reducing the need for mechanical respiratory support, alleviating respiratory symptoms and reducing mortality.
This is an efficacy and safety study of olaparib alone or in combination with bevacizumab being compared to bevacizumab with a fluoropyrimidine in participants with unresectable or metastatic colorectal cancer who have not progressed following first-line induction. The primary hypotheses are: Olaparib + Bevacizumab is superior to a fluoropyrimidine + Bevacizumab with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR); Olaparib is superior to a fluoropyrimidine + Bevacizumab with respect to PFS using RECIST 1.1 as assessed by BICR. As of amendment 5 study enrollment is being discontinued and study participants randomized to one of the two experimental arms (olaparib plus bevacizumab or olaparib monotherapy) must discontinue study intervention. Participants who are still on study treatment will no longer have tumor response assessments by BICR.
Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE) is an immune-mediated disease associated with inflammation of multiple organ systems. This study will evaluate how well elsubrutinib and upadacitinib given alone or as the ABBV-599 combination (elsubrutinib/upadacitinib) works within the body, in participants who completed study M19-130. This study will assess the change in disease symptoms. ABBV-599 is an investigational drug being developed for the treatment of Systemic Lupus Erythematosus (SLE). This study is "double-blinded", which means that neither the trial participants nor the study doctors will know who will be given which study drug. Study doctors put the participants into 1 of 4 groups called treatment arms. Each group receives a different treatment. Adult participants with a diagnosis of SLE will be enrolled. Around 260 participants will be enrolled in the study in approximately 100 sites worldwide. Participants will receive the following for up to 56 weeks: Participants will receive oral elsubrutinib capsules and/or oral upadacitinib tablets once daily for up to 56 weeks. Participants who were receiving elsubrutinib and/or upadacitnib in M19-130 will continue to receive the same treatment in this study. Participants who were receiving placebo in M19-130 will be re-randomized to one of the 2 combination treatment arms in this study. Arm 1: Elsubrutinib Dose A and Upadacitinib Dose A Arm 2: Elsubrutinib Dose A and Upadacitinib Dose B There may be higher burden for participants in this trial compared to their standard of care. Participants will attend monthly visits during the course of the study at a hospital or clinic. The effect of the treatment will be checked by medical assessments, blood tests, checking for side effects and completing questionnaires.
This is a randomised, double-masked, parallel group, multicentre study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, Pharmacokinetics (PK), and immunogenicity of SB15 compared to Eylea® in subjects with neovascular AMD.