There are about 1320 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Saudi Arabia. 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 primary objective of this study was to collect additional safety of INC424 in patients with Primary Myelofibrosis, Post Polycythemia Myelofibrosis or Post-essential Thrombocythemia Myelofibrosis, who either received prior treatment with commercially available agents or who have never received treatment.
Study assessing cognitive function and physical activity in people with relapsing remitting multiple sclerosis.
Epidemiology and clinical outcomes of invasive candidiasis in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia is not well studied. This observational study objectives include to determine the epidemiology, risk factors and outcomes of invasive Candida infection in critically ill patients in Saudi Arabia.
Prospective observational multi central cohort study to assess the incidence of osteo necrosis of jaw in cancer patient with bone metastasis starting Zoledronic acid treatment
A Randomized Phase II study of Adjuvant Concurrent Radiation and Chemotherapy versus Radiation alone in Resected High-Risk Malignant Salivary Gland Tumors
This study was to assess the safety of gene transfer via subretinal administration of rAAV2-VMD2-hMERTK in subjects with MERTK-associated retinitis pigmentosa (RP).
The purpose of the ISCHEMIA trial is to determine the best management strategy for higher-risk patients with stable ischemic heart disease (SIHD). This is a multicenter randomized controlled trial with 5179 randomized participants with moderate or severe ischemia on stress testing. A blinded coronary computed tomography angiogram (CCTA) was performed in most participants with eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73m2 to identify and exclude participants with either significant unprotected left main disease (≥50% stenosis) or those without obstructive CAD (<50% stenosis in all major coronary arteries). Of 8518 participants enrolled, those that had insufficient ischemia, ineligible anatomy demonstrated on CCTA or another exclusion criterion, did not go on to randomization. Eligible participants were then assigned at random to a routine invasive strategy (INV) with cardiac catheterization followed by revascularization, if feasible, plus optimal medical therapy (OMT) or to a conservative strategy (CON) of OMT, with cardiac catheterization and revascularization reserved for those who fail OMT. SPECIFIC AIMS A. Primary Aim The primary aim of the ISCHEMIA trial is to determine whether an initial invasive strategy of cardiac catheterization followed by optimal revascularization, if feasible, in addition to OMT, will reduce the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or hospitalization for unstable angina or heart failure in participants with SIHD and moderate or severe ischemia over an average follow-up of approximately 3.5 years compared with an initial conservative strategy of OMT alone with catheterization reserved for failure of OMT. B. Secondary Aims Secondary aims are to determine whether an initial invasive strategy compared to a conservative strategy will improve: 1) the composite of CV death or MI; 2) angina symptoms and quality of life, as assessed by the Seattle Angina Questionnaire; 3) all-cause mortality; 4) net clinical benefit assessed by including stroke in the primary and secondary composite endpoints; and 5) individual components of the composite endpoints. Condition: Coronary Disease Procedure: Coronary CT Angiogram Procedure: Cardiac catheterization Phase: Phase III per NIH Condition: Cardiovascular Diseases Procedure: Angioplasty, Transluminal, Percutaneous Coronary, other catheter-based interventions Phase: Phase III per NIH Condition: Heart Diseases Procedure: Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery Phase: Phase III per NIH
In this part of the Registry Program patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation (AF) at risk for stroke are enrolled to characterize the target population and to collect real world data on important outcome events. For administrative purposes the study is divided into two protocol numbers: 1160.129 for all non-EU (European Union) and non-EEA (European Economic Area) countries, and 1160.136 for EU and EEA countries. The total number of patients enrolled in both protocols is estimated to be 48,000 patients, and all these patients will be included in the data analysis for study 1160.129.
The purpose of this study is to find out whether adult patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit with septic shock who are given hydrocortisone compared to placebo (a dummy solution), will have an improved rate of survival 90 days later. Septic shock is the result of an infection, which triggers a complex response by the body (the inflammatory response) that causes a decrease in blood pressure and subsequently one or more organ systems to fail when blood supply to these organs is reduced. This may result in poor recovery and death. About a quarter of the people who suffer septic shock that is not rapidly reversed, will die. When patients are admitted to Intensive Care with sepsis and/or septic shock they receive a number of therapies. These include fluids given through a drip, antibiotics, drugs to boost your blood pressure and other organ systems. In addition to these therapies, steroids (hydrocortisone) are sometimes administered. Whether steroids are useful or not in the treatment of severe infections has been studied for more than 50 years. Previous research has suggested that the use of low dose steroid may have shortterm benefits in improving the circulation. However, there is no agreement amongst doctors around the world about whether treatment with or without low dose steroids improves the overall recovery and survival in patients with septic shock. This study would allow doctors to make informed decisions about whether the addition of low dose steroid therapy is better for patients with septic shock in intensive care. The study will include 3800 intensive care patients who have septic shock. Each enrolled patient will be randomised to receive either Hydrocortisone 200mg or placebo daily for 7 days as a continuous intravenous infusion while in intensive care. The patient will be followed for 90 days. If the patient is discharged prior to 90 days a telephone call will be made for the followup information. At six months the patient will be contacted again for completion of a quality of life questionnaire.
This prospective, multicenter, observational cohort study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of peginterferon alfa (e.g. Pegasys) plus ribavirin and treatment regimens containing direct-acting antivirals in patients with chronic hepatitis C who are treatment-naïve or treatment-experienced and HIV HCV co-infected. Data will be collected from patients receiving treatment according to current Summary of Product Characteristics and local labeling for the duration of their treatment and a 24-week follow-up.