There are about 2333 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Ireland. 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 purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab in combination with TACE versus TACE plus oral and intravenous (IV) placebos in participants with incurable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The primary hypotheses are that pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in combination with TACE is superior to placebo plus TACE with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).
The aim of this study is to measure the impact of musculoskeletal (MSK) complaints on the quality of life and general health of MSK Patients attending MSK triage clinics. The investigators will also record the proposed management options for patients' complaints. This will be achieved by asking patients to complete questionnaires (MSK HQ) at musculoskeletal triage clinic appointment, by undertaking a clinical assessment, by recording the proposed management plan and assessing if patients have follow up appointments for the same complaint in the following year. The investigators will also measure patient satisfaction using VSQ 9 Questionnaire. After a year the investigators will repeat the MSK HQ to assess the longterm impact of MSK Triage appointment on the MSK complaint.
To compare in diabetic patients eligible for percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) with minimal exclusion criteria, the efficacy and safety of Abluminus DES+ sirolimus- eluting stents (SES) versus XIENCE Everolimus-Eluting Stents (EES). At least 40% of patients are expected to be affected by multivessel coronary artery disease and 30% with acute coronary syndrome
This is an international, randomized, open-label, Phase 3 study designed to evaluate whether the potent and selective RET inhibitor, pralsetinib, improves outcomes when compared to a platinum chemotherapy-based regimen chosen by the Investigator from a list of standard of care treatments, as measured primarily by progression free survival (PFS), for participants with RET fusion-positive metastatic NSCLC who have not previously received systemic anticancer therapy for metastatic disease.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy compared to placebo plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy in participants with locally advanced cervical cancer. The primary hypotheses are that pembrolizumab plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy is superior to placebo plus concurrent chemoradiotherapy with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival. Once the study objectives have been met or the study has ended, participants will be discontinued from this study and will be enrolled in an extension study to continue protocol-defined assessments and treatment.
The purpose of this study is to compare the efficacy of olaparib (MK-7339) plus pembrolizumab (MK-3475) with chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab after induction with first-line chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab in triple negative breast cancer (TNBC). The primary hypotheses are: 1. Olaparib plus pembrolizumab is superior to chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab with respect to progression-free survival (PFS). 2. Olaparib plus pembrolizumab is superior to chemotherapy plus pembrolizumab with respect to overall survival (OS). As of Amendment 3, study enrollment was discontinued. Participants who were receiving benefit from the study intervention could continue treatment until criteria for discontinuation are met. Participants who are on study treatment or in follow-up phase will no longer have tumor response assessments by BICR.
This study will assess the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide plus Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT) versus placebo plus enzalutamide plus ADT in participants with mHSPC. The primary hypothesis is that in participants with mHSPC, the combination of pembrolizumab plus enzalutamide plus ADT is superior to placebo plus enzalutamide plus ADT with respect to 1) 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 2) overall survival (OS). As of 19-JAN-2023, the study was unblinded and all study participants stopped ongoing treatment with pembrolizumab/placebo and will continue to receive Standard of Care treatment until meeting protocol-specified discontinuation criteria if deriving clinical benefit. Safety analysis will be performed at the end of the study; there will be no further analyses for efficacy and electronic patient-reported outcome (ePRO) endpoints collected from participants beyond the IA1 cutoff date. All study participants will stop ongoing treatment with pembrolizumab/placebo. Exceptions may be requested for study participants who, in the assessment of their study physician, are benefitting from the combination of enzalutamide and pembrolizumab, after consulting with the Sponsor. All other study participants should be discontinued from study and be offered standard of care (SOC) treatment as deemed necessary by the Investigator. If enzalutamide as SOC is not accessible off study to the participant, central sourcing may continue. As of Amendment 04, disease progression will no longer be centrally verified, participants will only be assessed locally. As of Amendment 4, Second Course treatment is not an option for participants. There are currently no participants in the Second Course Phase.
The People's trial is an online pragmatic, randomised controlled trial to determine if reading a book in bed makes a difference to sleep in comparison to not reading a book in bed.
This study is a multicenter, open-label study of polatuzumab vedotin administered by intravenous (IV) infusion in combination with rituximab, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx) in participants with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). The study comprises of two stages: a safety run-in stage and a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
In the past, prescribing many medicines (polypharmacy) was seen in a negative light. However, because people are living longer and have several medical conditions at the same time, views on polypharmacy have changed. The challenge is to have the correct balance between enough medicines and too many medicines. Members of the research team have developed a new approach to achieving this balance. This approach has been tested in two general practices in Northern Ireland (NI). The approach (intervention package) currently consists of two parts: (1) a video showing how general practitioners (GPs) can prescribe appropriate polypharmacy for older patients, and (2) an appointment system for patients to visit a GP to have their medicines reviewed. As the intervention package was developed and tested in NI, further testing needs to be carried out in NI and the six border counties of the Republic of Ireland (ROI; Cavan, Donegal, Leitrim, Louth, Monaghan, and Sligo). This will be done in three stages or phases. In phase 1, which is now complete, 13 GPs were interviewed across 12 practices in the six border counties in the ROI; shown the video, asked about this new approach and asked if any changes are needed before doing more testing. In the next two phases (Phase 2 & 3) a small study will be carried out involving 12 practices: six practices in NI and six practices in the six border counties in the ROI and approximately 10 patients per practice. GP practices will either receive the intervention package and conduct medication reviews with recruited patients (intervention group) or continue to treat recruited patients as usual (control group). Interviews with up to 10 GPs and six members of practice staff (i.e. those involved in implementing the intervention within each practice) respectively in the six intervention group practices will also be conducted at the end of the intervention. Patients from the six intervention group practices will be asked to complete a feedback questionnaire after the delivery of the intervention (i.e. after completion of their final follow-up questionnaires).