There are about 3101 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Romania. 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 alnuctamab compared to standard of care regimens in participants with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).
This is a randomized comparative trial between percutaneous liver biopsy and EUS FNB guided liver biopsy in patients with parenchymal liver disease. Studies so far have been shown that EUS FNB guided liver biopsy is non inferior to percutaneous liver biopsy in terms of efficacy, provided several conditions are met (type of needle, wet suction, actuations). În terms of safety, it may be that EUS FNB have an advantage, as needle diameter is slightly smaller, needle is inserted under better visualisation especially in patients with large subcutaneous fat tissue and the possibility of examining the needle tract and plugging it with needle content if needed ("the blood patch technique"). However, although severe, the incidence of liver bleeding is low, so a comparative trial with the hypothesis that EUS FNB has fewer liver bleedings than percutaneous techniques would have a very large sample size. A recent study found out that abdominal pain at 2 hours after procedure is predictive for liver bleeding. So we have design a randomized prospective trial assuming that EUS FNB guided liver biopsy has significantly less abdominal pain at 2 hours after procedure when compared to percutaneous route, using abdominal pain at 2 hours as a surrogate marker for risk of liver bleeding.
This trial (BRONCUS) is a randomized one designed to evaluate the overall safety of ultrasound guided compared to bronchoscopy guided compared to ultrasound-bronchoscopy guided percutaneous tracheostomy, in order to find out if universal standardization is required or customized approach can be sufficient.
The investigators aim to study the predictive value of presepsin in ascites in newly admitted patients with chronic liver failure.
This study will look at how well CagriSema helps people with type 2 diabetes lower their blood sugar and body weight. CagriSema is a new investigational medicine. Doctors may not yet prescribe CagriSema. CagriSema will be compared to a medicine called tirzepatide that doctors may prescribe in some countries. Participants will get either CagriSema or tirzepatide. Which treatment participant get is decided by chance like flipping a coin. Participant will have an equal chance of receiving either drug. For each participant, the study will last for up to one and a half years.
The purpose of the study is to evaluate how effective JNJ-77242113 is in participants with moderate to severe plaque psoriasis compared to placebo and deucravacitinib.
This is a comparative study on patient and endoscopist experience during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy with NSAIDs (flurbiprofen) topical analgesia versus xilocaine spray topical anesthesia of the pharynx, before procedure.
Patients with colorectal polyps removed endoscopically (polypectomy, endoscopic mucosal resection, underwater endoscopic mucosal resection, endoscopic submucosal dissection) may experience delayed post polypectomy bleeding. The incidence is about one in 40 cases. There are risks factors for this complication, depending on the polyp type, patient demographics and co-morbidities and polypectomy technique. There are meta-analysis and nomograms for risk prediction available. We will try to predict delayed post polypectomy bleeding by using FIT (fecal immunochemical test), with a cut-off adapted to detect post polypectomy bleeding, administered daily for 2 weeks after polypectomy.
The investigators aim to establish wether the administration of pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy (PERT) improves visibility of the mucosa during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.
The goal of this clinical trial is to test the effectiveness of an intervention designed to promote mental health literacy in adolescents. The main questions it aims to answer are: 1. Whether this intervention can have an impact on mental health 2. Whether this intervention can have an impact on fostering academic performance, particularly in disadvantaged students (i.e., academic resilience) 3. Whether this intervention will have differential effectiveness as a function of the delivery format (psychoeducational materials only versus blended) Participants will receive either an online, automated intervention consisting of psychoeducational materials delivered at predetermined intervals (automated), or the same but with the addition of synchronous or asynchronous psychoeducational sessions held by a licensed psychologist (i.e., blended). These two conditions will also be compared to a Waitlist, to test if the interventions perform better than no treatment.