There are about 21071 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Spain. 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 evaluate the efficacy and safety of efavaleukin alfa in subjects with active systemic lupus erythematosus.
Arterial hypertension is an independent vascular risk factor and a frequent reason for consultation in Primary Care. It generates high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality (stroke, heart disease, kidney failure and other diseases). Moreover, given that it is a modifiable factor and that there are intervention and control measures that would lead to a significant reduction in cardiovascular incidence and morbimortality, it can be stated that ETS is a major public health problem. The approach to this risk factor can be pharmacological and non-pharmacological. The non-pharmacological approach is based on lifestyle modification. Among the measures aimed at modifying lifestyles is the restriction of daily intake of sodium in the diet. Such restriction enhances the hypotensive effect of pharmacological treatment so that its application and intensification would delay the start of pharmacological therapy, as well as avoid the need to increase the dose of antihypertensive drugs or the number of drugs to be used for the control of hypertension. In relation to salt intake in the Spanish population, the average is above the figures of less than 5 grams per day recommended by the WHO. Sodium intake can be estimated by determining the 24-hour urine sodium concentration. In addition, there is a positive correlation between systolic and diastolic blood pressure figures and the excretion of sodium in urine.
This trial will look at a drug called SGN-STNV to find out whether it is safe for patients with solid tumors. It will study SGN-STNV to find out what its side effects are. A side effect is anything the drug does besides treating cancer. It will also study how well SGN-STNV works to treat solid tumors. The study will have two parts. Part A of the study will find out how much SGN-STNV should be given to patients. Part B will use the dose found in Part A to find out how safe SGN-STNV is and if it works to treat certain types of solid tumors.
One tricky aspect of the recommendations for colonoscopy prep is diet. This has a significant impact on the experience of the patient or participant in the screening program and, on the other hand, low adherence has been found in some studies despite a potential Hawthorne effect . It is noteworthy that despite its impact on patient experience, it is an area for which little evidence is available, which is why the guidelines give low-quality recommendations and there is probably considerable variability in clinical practice . In the early days of colonoscopy, a liquid diet for 48 hours was mainly recommended, although some centers indicated a low-residue diet or even the commercially available NASA astronaut diet. Later, the indication for a liquid diet was consolidated until finally numerous studies were published in favor of a low-residue diet, managing to increase tolerance and the quality of the preparation . A limitation of the preparation studies must be borne in mind that the colon cleansing rating scales were not introduced until 1999 when the Aronchick scale was published. Although there is solid evidence in favor of a low-residue diet versus a liquid diet, the investigators do not have evidence on how many days of a low-residue diet should be recommended, and this is reflected in the ESGE (European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) and ASGE (American Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy) guidelines . A randomized clinical trial comparing 3 days versus 1 day of a low residue diet has recently been published . There were no statistically significant differences in the rate of adequate preparations (82.7% vs. 85.6% OR 1.2 95% IC 0.72 to 2.15). However, this study has limited statistical power and a design that allows a non-inferiority analysis has not been followed. In relation to this, our research group is finalizing a non-inferiority clinical trial in whose intermediate analysis, with 421 participants, the non-inferiority of 1 day of diet is fulfilled (rate of poor preparation in 1 day 0.95% vs. 4.74% in 3 days; d + 5%, difference -3.78% IC -6.88% to -1.12%) (38). It is likely, taking into account the available evidence and its evolution, that diet plays a secondary role in preparation. Although no studies designed to directly assess this have been conducted, the research group has indirect data. Walter et al, under the hypothesis that the impact of the fractional preparation and the new preparations on the preparation diminished the importance of the diet, conducted a non-inferiority clinical trial between 2012 and 2013 in which they randomized the patients to follow a diet liquid versus low residue for one day and fractional preparation with Moviprep (39). They established a non-inferiority margin of -13.5%. Their results show a rate of good preparation (Boston> 5) in 68/72 (94.4%) in a liquid diet compared to 60/68 (88.2%) in a low-residue diet (p = 0.04) with a difference of -5.08% demonstrating non-inferiority of the low residue diet.
First, to compare safety and effectiveness outcomes for canaloplasty and trabeculotomy using the OMNI Surgical System to implantation of the iStent inject in lowering intraocular pressure (IOP) in pseudophakic eyes with open angle glaucoma (OAG), and second, to compare safety and effectiveness outcomes for canaloplasty alone (using the OMNI Surgical System)to implantation of the iStent Inject in lowering IOP in pseudophakic eyes with OAG.
Participants in the intervention study will be 120 caregivers with guilt feelings linked with care and high levels of emotional distress (anxiety and/or depression), randomly allocated to the intervention conditions: intervention group and cognitive-behavioral comparison group. The intervention will be provided in a group setting and will consist in 8 sessions plus 3 booster sessions. The effect of the intervention on guilt feelings, depressive and anxious symptomatology, and biomarkers of cardiovascular risk will be assessed after the intervention and at follow-ups at 6 months.
This was a randomized, controlled, open-label, Phase 3 multicenter study which enrolled patients with Relapsed-Refractory Multiple Myeloma (RRMM) who were either double refractory to an Immunomodulatory Drug (IMiD) and a Proteasome Inhibitor (PI) (regardless of the number of prior lines of therapy), or had received at least 3 prior lines of therapy including an IMiD and a PI. Patients received treatment with melflufen+dexamethasone+daratumumab or daratumumab until documented progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or patient/treating physician decision. Patients in the daratumumab treatment arm had the option to receive treatment with melflufen+dexamethasone+daratumumab after confirmed progressive disease.
This study is being performed to evaluate the effectiveness of a new drug, clonidine HCl MBT, to prevent the onset of severe oral mucositis (SOM) in patients with oropharyngeal cancer (OPC) who are being treated with chemoradiotherapy. OPC occurs on the back of the tongue or throat and is often treated by the use of chemoradiotherapy, where radiation is localized to these areas. Radiation to the OPC affected tissues causes the release of small proteins called cytokines that cause damage to the area surrounding the tumor including the oral cavity. This damage is characterized by the formation of mucositis which includes redness, pain and ulcers in the mouth and back of the throat. In addition, as more chemoradiation is administered to treat OPC, the inability to eat a solid diet (a Grade 3 mucositis) or to consume anything at all by mouth (a Grade 4 mucositis) occurs in many patients. Collectively, Grade 3 and Grade 4 mucositis is referred to as SOM. It is a frequent, debilitating side effect of chemoradiation in OPC that may cause patients to stop or interrupt their treatment, develop other side effects like the inability to swallow, or require the increased use of pain medications. OPC survivors who have successful treatment of their tumors often develop permanent swallowing, speaking and range of motion issues that may be linked back to the inability to eat and/or drink caused by SOM during their chemoradiotherapy treatment. Clonidine may inhibit the production of cytokines that cause SOM and clonidine HCl mucoadhesive buccal tablet (MBT) has been designed to deliver sustained high levels of clonidine in the oral cavity, potentially decreasing cytokine production and leading to a decrease in the incidence of SOM. Clonidine HCl MBT is a once per day treatment provided as a tablet that a patient may self-administer to the gums, where it sticks tightly to release clonidine over many hours. The primary objective of this Phase 2b/3 study is to evaluate whether clonidine HCl MBT is more effective than placebo MBT in decreasing the incidence of SOM.
The aim of the study is to describe the safety, tolerability, and immunogenicity of MenABCWY in healthy infants 2 and 6 months of age.
This is a randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, multi-centre, 2-part study to assess the efficacy and safety of inhaled AZD1402. Part 1 will be performed in a Lead-in Cohort for each dose level to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) in a population with asthma controlled on medium dose inhaled corticosteroids (ICS)-long acting beta agonists (LABA) before progressing to dosing in adults with asthma who are uncontrolled on medium-to-high dose ICS-LABA in Part 2. The study will recruit participants receiving treatment with medium dose ICS with LABA for Part 1 and participants receiving treatment with medium-to-high dose ICS with LABA for Part 2 (separate inhalers or combination product). Part 2 will be initiated following evaluation of safety and PK at the relevant dose level in Part 1a. The entire study period for each participant in both Parts 1 and 2, is approximately 3.5 months; a 2-week Screening Period, a 4 week Run-in Period, 4 weeks of Treatment Period, and 4 weeks of Follow-Up Period.