View clinical trials related to Hypersensitivity.
Filter by:An observational study was designed to research the bacteriology and pathogen drug sensitivity of chronic dacryocystitis in China and optimize antibiotic therapy.
Compare the analytical and clinical performance of hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT assays for the diagnosis of acute myocardial injury and myocardial infarction in patients presenting to the emergency department in whom serial cTnI measurements are obtained on clinical indication.
Allergic diseases, including allergic asthma, allergic rhinitis and anaphylaxis are not properly classified in current classifications of diseases. We here propose a project based on the evaluation of medical records of hospital databases of patients suffering for allergic and hypersensitivity conditions coded with the current and a new coming version of the international classification of diseases, no patient or intervention will be analysed. We here propose a study to update and reach quality assurance of the classification of allergic and hypersensitivity conditions in international classification systems. The Allergic and hypersensitivity conditions section has indeed been recently built into the new ICD-11 framework and we aim to reach its quality assurance by evaluating medical records of French hospital databases. All the consecutive cases related to allergic and hypersensitivity conditions registered in the last 1 year will be selected and blind-coded by two independent coders based on the online English versions of the ICD-10 (2015 version) and ICD-11 Beta draft. The generated data will support the intra and inter-variability testing, survey among end-users and economic-impact evaluation. The economic impact of the transition from ICD-10 to ICD-11 will be analysed based on average estimated cost per day of each principal diagnosis and the effect of the classification change will be quantified by the cost variance of inter or intra diagnosis of ICD-10 and ICD-11. For the bridge procedure based on the alignment of the allergic and hypersensitivity conditions described into the ICD-10 (and ICD-10 CM US adaptation) framework to the ICD-11 beta phase, we propose the mapping and cross-linking terms methods. Meanwhile, we will start updating the allergic and hypersensitivity procedures by influencing the International Classification of Health Intervention (ICHI).
Teicoplanin is an antibiotic used very commonly to prevent infection during surgery. Its use has expanded rapidly in the last few years, with around 18,500 doses administered in Leeds Teaching Hospitals NHS Trust alone, in 2014-15. Unfortunately, anaphylaxis (a severe allergic reaction) to the drug appears to be increasing. These reactions can result in admission to intensive care, prolong hospital stay, or even be fatal. It is vital that patients who suffer anaphylaxis have tests to accurately identify the cause, so they can avoid the drug in future. However these tests are currently very limited, because we don't have any diagnostic tools proven to confirm or refute a diagnosis of teicoplanin allergy. We have to make a 'best guess' diagnosis, leaving patients vulnerable to harm in the future, should they require antibiotics again. We need to reliably diagnose teicoplanin allergy to reduce this arm. Where a diagnosis of teicoplanin allergy is confirmed, patients and their doctors know to avoid it. Importantly, where allergy is excluded, teicoplanin can be safely used, avoiding alternatives that may be less effective, more toxic, and more expensive. This directly benefits individuals, saves the NHS money by reducing avoidable harm, and helps improve antibiotic stewardship at a population level - which in the long term helps reduce antibiotic resistance. The clinical need for this work has become imperative. Collaborating with our industry partner ThermoFisher (significant expertise in this area), we aim to: 1. Standardise the current skin testing protocols being used when testing patients with suspected teicoplanin allergy. 2. Develop laboratory tests to support the skin tests, and give a more confident diagnosis to patients. 3. Understand how and why people develop allergy to teicoplanin, to better predict and modify the allergic response.
The objective of this clinical study is to evaluate the effect of the whitening treatment performed with the violet LED light (405-410 nm), with or without a bleaching gel, on the tooth color changes (immediate and long-term), tooth sensitivity, satisfaction of participants in relation to the technique and impact on their quality of life. After being informed of the objectives of the study, 200 participants will be selected and randomly divided into a treatment group (n = 25): G1 - 35% hydrogen peroxide (HP) (4 sessions, 1 session/week); G2 - 30% carbamide peroxide (CP) (4 sessions, 1 session/week); G3 - Violet LED (405-410 nm, 4 sessions, 1 session/week); G4 - Violet LED (405-410 nm, 4 sessions, 2 sessions/week); G5 - Violet LED associated to 35% hydrogen peroxide (4 sessions, 1 session / week); G6 - Violet LED associated to 30% carbamide peroxide (4 sessions, 1 session / week); G7 - hybrid technique HP (Violet LED + application of 35% hydrogen peroxide + violet LED) (4 sessions, 1 session/week); G8 - Hybrid technique CP HP (Violet LED + application of 30% carbamide peroxide + violet LED) (4 sessions, 1 session/week). The color evaluation will be performed at predetermined times (before and immediately after treatment, 14 days after completion of bleaching and 3, 6 and 12 months after completion of bleaching), and quantitatively evaluated by colorimetric tests (objective and subjective) and spectrophotometry. In addition, it will be evaluated the tooth sensitivity during and after (48 hours) tooth whitening (VAS Scale), satisfaction with the treatment and impact on quality of life (OHIP-14 questionnaire). The data, except for survey data of satisfaction (descriptive evaluation), will be subjected to statistical analysis to determine the homogeneity and normality of the sample and for comparison between treatment groups, considering a 5% significance level.
The purpose of this study is to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of AR101 through oral immunotherapy (OIT) in peanut-allergic children.
Asthma and allergy is increasing in Norway and Western countries. Treatment is still mostly symptomatic. Extracts of the immunomodulatory and edible mushroom Agaricus blazei, such as Andosan™, have been shown to protect against asthma and allergy in murine models by changing the T helper cell 1(upregulation)-T helper cell 2 (downregulation) balance in the immune system. Andosan™ is produced in Japan and approved as food (mushroom juice) in Norway. Blood donors and possibly patients with pollen-derived allergy and asthma will be included in the study.The aim is to examine whether Andosan™ i) has similar clinical effects against allergy and asthma in man as it has in mice, and ii) reduces drug use and increases frequency of blood donations. Blood donors or patients who are recruited with informed consent will be given Andosan™ or placebo orally as add-on treatment to ordinary treatment for 7 weeks during the Birch pollen season, and specific IgE will be measured before, during and after the intervention, in addition to basophil activation testing and filling out of a questionnaire.
An emerging problem in clinical practice is how to manage the growing number of patients who experience symptoms related to the ingestion of gluten-containing foods gluten and in whom celiac disease has been ruled out. These patients most frequently report gastrointestinal symptoms such as diarrhea, abdominal discomfort or pain, bloating, flatulence, but also extraintestinal symptoms, including headache, lethargy, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, ataxia, or recurrent oral ulceration. This heterogeneous syndrome, which has been reported to improve or even disappear after gluten withdrawal and to relapse after gluten challenge, is called non-celiac gluten sensitivity.1 The concept of nonceliac gluten sensitivity is not completely new. Besides several sporadic single cases reported, more than 30 years ago an oral, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over gluten challenge trial showed that six out of eight adult non-celiac patients, who suffered from intestinal symptoms caused by the ingestion of gluten-containing food, were affected by gluten-sensitive diarrhea. Over the last few years, an intense debate about the existence and the prevalence of nonceliac gluten sensitivity has emerged, as shown by the considerable increase in internet forums of discussion on this topic and in availability of gluten-free food. A definition of nonceliac gluten sensitivity based on definitive scientific evidence does not still exist, and the clinical trials conducted so far in order to fill this knowledge gap are burdened by a number of biases. In a cross-over trial of subjects with suspected NCGS, the severity of overall (intestinal plus extraintestinal) symptoms increased significantly during 1 week of intake of small amounts of gluten (daily 4.375 grams), compared with placebo. Among the 59 participants in this trial, the Investigatotors identified only three true gluten-sensitive patients, defined as having a delta overall score -calculated by subtracting the weekly overall score under placebo from that under gluten- higher than the mean delta overall score plus 2 standard deviations. However, these results should be cautiously interpreted due to the lack of a control group of non-gluten-sensitive subjects. On this basis, the Investigators will conduct a randomized, dose-finding, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over gluten challenge trial aimed at comparing the effects of a daily dose of 8.4 grams of gluten with those of a daily dose of 6.0 or 4.2 grams of gluten on a cohort of subjects with nonceliac gluten sensitivity versus healthy volunteers.
This is a single center, randomized control. Sixty eligible subjects will be recruited into 3 study treatment groups (n=20 per group) through computerized randomization. Subjects in group 1 will be treated with 8% arginine containing paste(Colgate® Sensitive Pro-Relief™), group 2 with 5% topical fluoride varnish (Acclean) and group 3 with self-adhesive resin (Seal and protect, Dentsply). The subjects in the study will be evaluated for tactile and air-blast hypersensitivity criteria at baseline, two and four weeks.
This is a multicenter, randomized, controlled, open-label study including patients with recurrent, platinum-sensitive, ovarian, peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer. The main scope of the trial is to evaluate QoL during chemotherapy comparing trabectedin/PLD with other standard platinum-based chemotherapy in platinum-sensitive disease.