There are about 25435 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in United Kingdom. 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.
This study is designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, PK and preliminary efficacy following oral administration of AZD3470 as a monotherapy, and in combination with other anticancer agents in participants with haematologic malignancies.
This is a Phase 1/2, global multicentre, open-label, single-arm, dose escalation and dose optimisation study of AZD0486 to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of AZD0486 monotherapy in participants with R/R B ALL who have received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapies. The study will consist of 3 parts. Part A monotherapy dose escalation. Part B dose optimisation. Part C Dose expansion at the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D)
The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of opevesostat plus hormone replacement therapy (HRT) compared to alternative abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide in participants with Metastatic Castration-resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with one next-generation hormonal agent (NHA). The primary study hypotheses are that opevesostat is superior to alternative abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide with respect to radiographic progression free survival (rPFS) per Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG) Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) as assessed by Blinded Independent Central Review (BICR) and overall survival (OS), in androgen receptor ligand binding domain (AR LBD) mutation positive and negative participants.
This is a phase 3, randomized, open-label study of opevesostat compared to alternative abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide in participants with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) with respect to overall survival (OS) and to radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) per Prostate Cancer Working Group (PCWG) Modified Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) in participants with mCRPC previously treated with next-generation hormonal agent (NHA) and taxane-based chemotherapy. It is hypothesized that opevesostat is superior with respect to OS and rPFS per PCWG Modified RECIST 1.1 as assessed by BICR in androgen receptor ligand binding domain (AR LBD) mutation-negative and -positive participants.
The goal of this study is to evaluate nemtabrutinib compared with investigator's choice of ibrutinib or acalabrutinib in participants with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL)/small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) who have not received any prior therapy. The primary hypotheses are that (1) nemtabrutinib is non-inferior to ibrutinib or acalabrutinib with respect to objective response rate (ORR) per International Workshop on Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (iwCLL) Criteria 2018 by blinded independent central review (BICR) and (2) nemtabrutinib is superior to ibrutinib or acalabrutinib with respect to progression free survival (PFS) per iwCLL Criteria 2018 by BICR.
Referrals for autism assessment have greatly increased in the last few years. This means that waiting times are longer for families, and children and young people are struggling to get the support they need. This also means that the number of autistic children and young people there is assumed to be is not correct. A better understanding of the true number of autistic children and young people is needed so that better support for them can be provided. This research aims to understand what autism looks like in Kent, Surrey, and Sussex (KSS) to better help autistic children and young people. To do this, schools will be asked about the number of autistic children in their school to better understand the number of children and young people with autism in KSS. Secondly, autistic children and young people will be interviewed to find out about the support they need. The information gathered will help the research team to develop a quality-of-life measure, which can be used by schools to help autistic children and young people get the support they need.
In this trial, medicine NNC0560-0004 given in capsule form will be compared to placebo in healthy volunteers. Participants will either get NNC0560-0004 or placebo. Which treatment they get is decided by chance. This is a first in human trial, which means that this is the first time that NNC0560-0004 is given to humans. The study will last for about two weeks plus the screening period (approximately 42 days) which in all is about 8 weeks. Women must be of non-childbearing potential thus you cannot take part if you are pregnant, can become pregnant, breast-feeding or plan to get pregnant during the study period.
The primary objectives of this study are to compare sacituzumab tirumotecan to Treatment of Physician's Choice (TPC) with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) per response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST 1.1), as assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR), and overall survival (OS). The primary hypotheses are that sacituzumab tirumotecan is superior to TPC with respect to PFS per RECIST 1.1, as assessed by BICR, and that sacituzumab tirumotecan is superior to TPC with respect to OS.
A study in healthy male and female participants of non-childbearing potential who have overweight or obesity
This study has been added as a sub study to the Simulation Training for Emergency Department Imaging 2 study (ClinicalTrials.gov ID NCT05427838). This work aims to evaluate the impact of an Artificial Intelligence (AI)-enhanced algorithm called Boneview on the diagnostic accuracy of clinicians in the detection of fractures on plain XR (X-Ray). The study will create a dataset of 500 plain X-Rays involving standard images of all bones other than the skull and cervical spine, with 50% normal cases and 50% containing fractures. A reference 'ground truth' for each image to confirm the presence or absence of a fracture will be established by a senior radiologist panel. This dataset will then be inferenced by the Gleamer Boneview algorithm to identify fractures. Performance of the algorithm will be compared against the reference standard. The study will then undertake a Multiple-Reader Multiple-Case study in which clinicians interpret all images without AI and then subsequently with access to the output of the AI algorithm. 18 clinicians will be recruited as readers with 3 from each of six distinct clinical groups: Emergency Medicine, Trauma and Orthopedic Surgery, Emergency Nurse Practitioners, Physiotherapy, Radiology and Radiographers, with three levels of seniority in each group. Changes in reporting accuracy (sensitivity, specificity), confidence, and speed of readers in two sessions will be compared. The results will be analyzed in a pooled analysis for all readers as well as for the following subgroups: Clinical role, Level of seniority, Pathological finding, Difficulty of image. The study will demonstrate the impact of an AI interpretation as compared with interpretation by clinicians, and as compared with clinicians using the AI as an adjunct to their interpretation. The study will represent a range of professional backgrounds and levels of experience among the clinical element. The study will use plain film x-rays that will represent a range of anatomical views and pathological presentations, however x-rays will present equal numbers of pathological and non-pathological x-rays, giving equal weight to assessment of specificity and sensitivity. Ethics approval has already been granted, and the study will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at relevant conferences.