There are about 8563 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Sweden. 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 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.
The purpose of the study is to determine if the combination of niraparib with Abiraterone Acetate (AA) plus prednisone compared with AA plus prednisone in participants with deleterious germline or somatic Homologous Recombination Repair (HRR) gene-mutated Metastatic Castration-Sensitive Prostate Cancer (mCSPC) provides superior efficacy in improving radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS).
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the role of neoadjuvant immunotherapy and to demonstrate high pathologic complete response (pCR) and near pCR rates in melanoma participants with clinically detectable nodal disease and a high risk of recurrence. Neoadjuvant immunotherapy aims to enhance the systemic T-cell response to tumor antigens while detectable tumor is still present, inducing a stronger and broader tumor-specific immune response. Of the neoadjuvant approaches studied within melanoma, the neoadjuvant combination of nivolumab and ipilimumab has demonstrated high pCR and near pCR rates that may translate to prolonged clinical benefit.
This study will evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of trastuzumab deruxtecan compared with investigator's choice chemotherapy in human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER)2-low, hormone receptor (HR) positive breast cancer patients whose disease has progressed on endocrine therapy in the metastatic setting.
Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the world with a high postoperative mortality (2 - 6%) as well as a low 5-year survival (40%). Despite advances in surgery and the use of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery in recent years and adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery, long-term prognosis has only improved marginally. Epidural analgesia is commonly used as a part of the perioperative management of patients undergoing open, colorectal cancer surgery. Not only does it reduce pain and stress, epidurals have been shown to reduce perioperative inflammation and preserve immunological function, all of which may be beneficial in perioperative tumorigenesis. In several retrospective studies, anesthesia and choice of analgesia have shown to improve long-term survival, but no randomized studies have been published in the literature today. Similarly, the benefits of propofol anesthesia in comparison to inhalational anesthesia have recently been high-lighted in relation to cancer surgery, and many patients today request the use of epidurals, total intravenous anesthesia and loco-regional anesthetic technique during surgery, without clear evidence from prospective studies in the literature. Therefore, the question as to the real benefit of anesthesia technique in postoperative outcomes and tumor recurrence remain unanswered, and skepticism abounds amongst both surgeons and anesthesiologists. It is therefore important to study short- and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing CRC surgery, comparing epidural vs. no epidural or inhalational vs. total intravenous anesthesia. However, prospective, randomized studies are costly, require many patients, and the benefits of choice of anesthesia and analgesia on outcome remain uncertain from the current literature. There is a clear diffusion in practice across the world in the choice of anesthesia for patients undergoing CRC surgery, a lack of evidence in the literature and an absence of guidelines on best practice anesthesia care. We believe that by performing a large, prospective, observational, international, pragmatic study, with low costs, it will be possible to answer some of the important questions pertaining to the choice of anesthesia and analgesia. The clinical trials network at the European Society of Anesthesiology will play an important role in the success of this study.
This is a Phase 3 study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of crinecerfont versus placebo administered for 24 weeks in approximately 165 adult participants with classic CAH due to 21-hydroxylase deficiency. The study consists of a 6-month randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled period, followed by 1 year of open-label treatment with crinecerfont. Subsequently, participants may elect to participate in the open-label extension (OLE) period. The duration of participation in the study is approximately 20 months for the core study and will be a variable amount of time per subject for the OLE (estimated to be approximately 3 years).
The aim of this study was to investigate if previous findings on the association between dressing treatments and subjective opinion on final donor site scar outcome using the patient scale of POSAS could be confirmed objectively. Scar outcome measurements were assessed by a blinded observer using POSAS and the device: Cutometer dual MPA 580 (Courage and Khazaka Electronic GmbH, Cologne, Germany) to measure the viscoelasticity of the skin.
This is a randomised, double-blind clinical investigation to evaluate the efficacy and safety of D005 vaginal mousse compared to placebo, in women with bacterial vaginosis. The study will be conducted at one site in Scotland, United Kingdom and at six different sites in Sweden. The study population will consist of approximately 83 female subjects.
Background Patients less than 80 years of age, who suffer a myocardial infarction (MI) are usually (>90%) offered an early invasive strategy including coronary angiography possibly followed by intervention, preferably percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). Among non ST-elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) patients, 80 years of age or over, only approximately 40% receive an invasive approach in Sweden, since the majority are handled in a conservative way, i.e. with medical treatment only. Furthermore, as with pharmacological treatment, there is a large variation between Swedish counties regarding the choice of strategy for the treatment of elderly (80+) patients with NSTEMI with an even larger variation between acute hospitals ranging from 20% to 90 %. The Swedish national guidelines for heart disease have emphasized that the patient's biological age, i.e. the patient's biological status and expected length of life, is crucial for decision-making. The Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) is a global clinical measure of biological age, mixing co-morbidity, disability and cognitive impairment. The investigators have previously reported the potential importance of frailty for short-term (1 month) and medium-term outcome (1 year) in a NSTEMI population. However, published data on the role of frailty´s prognostic value, its capacity to predict adverse effects including complications, and the potential to guide clinical decision-making for elderly patients with myocardial infarction are scarce. Similarly, there is a lack of knowledge of how different patterns of comorbidity burden might influence rational decision-making. Aims To explore the association between frailty and treatment patterns in cardiac care To study the association between outcomes and degree of frailty, with and without comprehensive adjustment for differences in baseline characteristics. To study how treatment benefits for patients admitted to coronary care units differ in patients depending on comorbidities and frailty. Hypothesis The investigators hypothesize that frailty is independently associated with worse outcomes, including mortality, readmissions and complications. Methods and material An observational, register based, multicentre study. Inclusion criteria: Patients consecutively included in the Swedish Web-System for Enhancement and Development of Evidence-Based Care in Heart Disease Evaluated According to Recommended Therapies (SWEDEHEART) registry. Exclusion criteria: None. SWEDEHEART is a national quality registry collecting information on all patients hospitalized with MI or suspected MI. All 72 Swedish hospitals with acute coronary care contribute with data. Briefly, information is collected prospectively about individual patients' medical history, treatment before admission, management during hospital stay, treatment at discharge, and diagnoses. Approximately 20.000 patients diagnosed with MI are included in this register per year. From January 1st 2020 frailty (CFS) is a mandatory variable in the registry. However, as a pilot project to ensure feasibility, five hospitals began to register frailty November 1st, 2017. For the investigators initial analyses data will be used from the pilot study to assess the association between CFS level and outcomes. The data extraction will be done by one of the monitors of the SWEDEHEART registry. After about two years the investigators will extract data prospectively entered into the registry. The frailty instrument The crucial study instrument CFS is a 9-point scale. It has good predictive validity and prognostic power, is relying on clinical judgment, and is relatively easily used in clinical practice. Since the scale includes several degrees it can be considered to be particularly appropriate for risk stratification, and accordingly it has been used for this purpose. The investigators have got the instrument owner´s permission to use this scale. The case record form (CRF) focus on demographic and clinical patient characteristics registered in the SWEDEHEART, particularly those which are supposed to be potential confounders when testing the hypothesis: chronological age, gender, cardiovascular risk, diabetes, heart failure, renal insufficiency, other co-morbidities, including the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), previous MI, medications, ejection fraction, and the classification of MI. Cardiovascular risk will be assessed according to the Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE) risk score (GRS). Results from echocardiography, ECGs, laboratory testing and registration of anthropometric data will be included according to routine practice within the frame of SWEDEHEART. Follow-up of cohorts of invasively or conservatively treated patients with different stages of frailty will be done one, three, six, 12, 24 and 36 months after the inclusion point respectively.
The overall purpose of this clinical treatment research project is to explore novel diagnostics that can guide the treatment of infections associated to orthopaedic implants, in order to improve patient outcomes and reduce the development of antibiotic resistance. The project aims are: (i) To improve the current diagnostic approaches and treatments of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) (ii) To investigate the pathogenesis of PJI through the characterization of the virulence carried by the causative pathogens This multidisciplinary project addresses implant-associated infection and its contribution to increasing antibiotic resistance. Both lead to longer hospital stays, higher medical costs and increased morbidity and mortality. Antibiotic resistance is globally considered as one of the greatest and most urgent risk in medicine. Implant-associated infections are commonly caused by biofilms. Biofilms can be described as 'a community of bacterial cells connected by their secreted extracellular matrix'. Since antibiotics are designed to fight planktonic free-living bacteria, studying antibiotic resistance in biofilm communities poses a paradigm shift. Furthermore, bacteria in biofilms are up to 1000 times more resistant to antibiotics than planktonic bacteria. Mechanisms involved in a biofilm infection also play a crucial role in the development of antibiotic resistance. Hospital-acquired infections are the fourth leading cause of disease and 70% are associated with medical implants and caused by staphylococcal biofilms. In addition, the level of antimicrobial resistance in bacteria causing implant-associated infections has increased worldwide, leaving patients with fewer treatment options. In this study the investigators will randomize patients with PJI to either standard MIC susceptibility or MIC and MBEC susceptibility guided treatment with oral antibiotic combinations; (i) Non cell wall active standard of care antibiotic combination (MIC-guided) for 6 weeks. (ii) Or; non cell wall active antibiotic combination according to a MBEC-based decision algorithm for 6 weeks. In this pilot project, the primary endpoint is how often treatment changes with the MBEC susceptibility testing compared to only MIC-susceptibility testing.