There are about 13332 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Netherlands. 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 study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apalutamide in adult men with high-risk non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.
This is a European multinational, multicenter, non-interventional (observational) and prospective study. It is carried on to confirm in real life conditions the benefit/risk of vandetanib (CAPRELSA™) 300 mg, both in RET negative and RET positive patients with symptomatic, aggressive, sporadic, unresectable, locally advanced/metastatic MTC.
This is a study to investigate the safety and tolerability of the partial A1 agonist BAY1067197 in patients with chronic heart failure. BAY1067197 will be applied as a single dose of 30 mg in addition to standard therapy including a beta-blocker. The aim of the study is to assess if a single oral dose of 30 mg BAY1067197 is well tolerated when given on top of standard therapy for heart failure, particularly ß-blocker treatment.
To continue the evaluation of the safety and efficacy of BAX 855 for prophylaxis and treatment of bleeding episodes in adult and pediatric previously treated patients (PTPs) aged ≤ 75 years of age with severe hemophilia A.
The purpose of this study is to assess the effect of transvenous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) on the immune response. In the human endotoxemia model, intravenously administered endotoxin (lipopolysaccharide [LPS]) elicits a systemic immune response with release of pro-inflammatory cytokines, such as TNF α. This trial will determine if an anti-inflammatory effect can be produced by acute VNS using a minimally invasive delivery method.
Rationale: Axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA) is an inflammatory back pain disorder affecting up to 24% of young chronic low back pain (CLBP) patients. For general practitioners (GPs) it is difficult to distinguish axSpA patients in the large amount of CLBP patients. In previous studies a referral rule for axSpA applicable in CLBP patients was developed and validated. The next step is to investigate the impact of the referral rule in daily practice. This impact analysis will test if the referral rule will be beneficial or harmful. Objective: To evaluate the clinical impact of a referral rule in young patients presenting at the general practitioners with chronic low back pain, who are at risk for axSpA, compared to usual care. Study design: A cluster randomized clinical trial. Study population: Primary care patients with chronic low back pain, aged 18-45 years. Intervention (if applicable): GPs are randomized in clusters either to use directly the referral rule or use the referral rule after 4 months. The referral rule consists out of four variables, a positive ASAS inflammatory back pain questionnaire, a positive family history for spondyloarthritis, a good reaction to NSAIDs (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs) and back pain duration longer than 5 years. If at least two out of four variables are present a referral to the rheumatologist is advised. Main study parameters/endpoints: The primary outcome is a change in the Roland Morris Disability Questionnaire (RMDQ) compared to baseline in the CLBP patients with or without use of the referral model. Secondary parameters: Quality of life measurements, cost-effectiveness, pain and fatigue and referral to rheumatologist and diagnosis of axSpA. Nature and extent of the burden and risks associated with participation, benefit and group relatedness: The burden and risks associated with participation are minimal. No medical intervention is taken place. If the GP of the patients is randomized to the referral model, the patient is checked for the risk of axial spondyloarthritis, by the non-invasive referral model. If the referral model is positive a referral to the rheumatologist is advised. Is the GP is randomized to the 'usual care' there is no difference in the treatment of low back pain than nowadays. A GP is still allowed to treat the CLBP patients optimal and a referral to the rheumatologist is allowed but not actively advised. All participating CLBP patients are asked to fill several questionnaires at four different time points, at baseline, after 12 months and after 24 months. In total there are 8 questionnaires and four separate questions. The questionnaire are designed to fill out by the patient themselves. The total time to fill in the questionnaire is estimated to be 30 minutes. The benefits of the study are: - For the CLBP patients, up to 24% of the back pain complaints are caused by axSpA, but the GPs are not (yet) aware of this disease. When a CLBP patient is participating in this study, the chance of having axSpA as cause for the back pain is investigated. This a benefit for a CLBP patients since there is effective treatment for axSpA. - For the GP it is very difficult to distinguish an axSpA patients in the large amount of CLBP patients. If it appears that the validated referral rule has an impact on CLBP and GPs, the next step will be implementation of this referral model in daily practice and it will become a helpful tool for the GP. - For the society, CLBP is a great socioeconomic burden for the society. When one of the causes for CLBP, namely axSpA is diagnosed and treated in an earlier stage this will lead to a decreased sick leave because of back pain and is therefore potentially cost-effective.
The purpose of this registry is to collect data in order to discover whether melanoma patients with minimal SN tumor burden should undergo a complete lymph node dissection (CLND) or not. Currently, if a patient has a positive (or metastatic) SN, this patient will be offered a CLND, which is a surgical intervention aiming to remove all lymph nodes from the same nodal basin as the SN. However, if the positive (or metastatic) SN is only minimally involved, some centers and/or countries do not offer a CLND routinely. As a matter of fact, the CLND procedure does not increase survival for patients with a minimal SN tumor burden, but can add prognostic information, potentially useful in the subsequent decision-making process. However, this is a surgical operation for the patient, which might be accompanied by significant side effects. Moreover, only approximately 20% of patients with a metastatic SN have further lymph node metastases in the same basin, which means that about 4 patients out of 5 will not benefit from a CLND. Thus, there is an urgent need to identify which SN positive patients could be safely spared from a CLND. It has been demonstrated that breast cancer patients with minimal SN tumor burden can be safely managed with nodal observation only, without performing a CLND. There is evidence that the same situation exists in melanoma as well, but this needs to be validated and this is why we are conducting this registry. The results of this registry will be crucial to establish an accepted standard of care (CLND or nodal observation) for melanoma patients with minimal SN tumor burden.
The study is a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled, Phase 3 clinical trial with the primary objective of demonstrating the superiority of palbociclib in combination with fulvestrant (Faslodex®) over fulvestrant alone in prolonging PFS in women with HR+, HER2 negative metastatic breast cancer whose disease has progressed after prior endocrine therapy. The safety between the two treatment arms will also be compared. During study treatment, pre- and perimenopausal women must be receiving therapy with the LHRH agonist goserelin (Zoladex® or generic).
As one of the few centers, MAASTRO also aggressively re-treats patients with recurrent non-small cell lung cancer. Even after primary radical treatment to high doses, re-irradiation (with concurrent chemotherapy) is also given in curative intent, thus again using high doses of radiation. Publications on high-dose re-irradiation of lung cancer patients are scarce, and outcome and toxicity for patients treated in MAASTRO are unknown at present. This study will provide knowledge on benefit and risks of such a therapeutic approach.
One of the contributing factors to the variability in outcomes amongst Cochlear Implant (CI) recipients was reported to be the placement of the electrode array in the scala tympani. It seems that the correct placement of the electrode initially into the scala tympani and subsequent avoidance of dislocation into the scala vestibuli as the insertion progresses, is a key factor in achieving good speech perception outcomes. Another important aspect related to the performance is the achievement of consistent electrical coverage with the electrode. Data reported for electrodes of different manufacturers give depths ranging from 240 - 600 degrees showing the considerable variation across subjects. The HiFocus mid scala electrode was developed to cover one and a quarter turn and with the pre-curved design to be less susceptible to variations in individual cochlea dimensions and insertion techniques. A further mechanical feature of the pre-curved design is the avoidance of forces against the cochlear lateral wall and associated lower susceptibility of the electrode for moving out of the cochlea following insertion. Recently, a cone beam CT (CBCT) technique is being explored in the field of ENT with the potential to overcome some of the issues associated with the conventional CT techniques such as scattering, radiation and low isometric resolution. Images with comparable details to those of e.g. micro CTs are possible with much lower radiation dose. Modern imaging software i.e. 3D Slicer (www.slicer.org) may be used for 3D reconstruction, post processing and Brainsfit for registration. Registration is the alignment of two scans in the same coordinate system. This enables the identification of differences between two images recorded at time x and y. Once accurately superimposed any difference between the two images may be identified with an accuracy of 0.2 mm. Using these methods, one can assess the stability and the position of the electrode in the cochlea. Objective: The primary objectives of this study are to evaluate the feasibility of using cone beam CT technique in combination with (high resolution) MRI to identify electrode movements following cochlear implant surgery and identify the inter-scalar position of the HFms electrode. The secondary objective is to quantify the average insertion depth and variations of the HFms electrode