There are about 6461 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Russian Federation. 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.
Primary Objective: To characterize the patients who receive Dupixent® (dupilumab) for AD in a real-world setting, with respect to their medical history, socio-demographic and disease characteristics, and prior and concomitant treatments of AD Secondary Objectives: - To characterize real-world use patterns of Dupixent® for AD (eg, used regimens, reason for initiation of new treatments, concomitant therapies, treatment durations and reasons for discontinuation and/or switching) - To assess the long-term effectiveness of Dupixent® in AD patients in a real-world setting - To assess comorbid atopic conditions and effects of treatment in comorbid atopic conditions in patients who receive Dupixent® for AD - To collect safety data on study participants
This study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) with lenvatinib (E7080/MK-7902) vs. docetaxel in participants with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and progressive disease (PD) after platinum doublet chemotherapy and treatment with one prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 monoclonal antibody (mAb). The primary hypotheses of this study are that pembrolizumab + lenvatinib (compared with docetaxel) prolongs: 1) overall survival (OS); and progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors Version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) based on blinded independent central review (BICR).
The current study will compare pembrolizumab (MK-3475) plus maintenance olaparib, vs. pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib placebo for the treatment of squamous NSCLC. The study's 2 primary hypotheses are: 1. Pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib is superior to pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib placebo with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST 1.1 by blinded independent clinical review (BICR). 2. Pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib is superior to pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib placebo with respect to overall survival (OS). As of Amendment 07, there will be no further analyses for OS and patient-reported outcome assessments.
The current study will compare pembrolizumab (MK-3475) plus maintenance olaparib, vs pembrolizumab plus maintenance pemetrexed for the treatment of nonsquamous NSCLC. The study's 2 primary hypotheses are: 1. Pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib is superior to pembrolizumab plus maintenance pemetrexed with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST 1.1) by blinded independent clinical review (BICR) and 2. Pembrolizumab plus maintenance olaparib is superior to pembrolizumab plus maintenance pemetrexed with respect to overall survival (OS).
The reason for this study is to see if the study drug called baricitinib works and is safe in children and teenage participants with atopic dermatitis.
A Phase 3, multicenter, open-label, randomized study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of fedratinib compared to best available therapy (BAT) in subjects with DIPSS (Dynamic International Prognostic Scoring System)-intermediate or high-risk primary myelofibrosis (PMF), post-polycythemia vera myelofibrosis (post-PV MF), or post-essential thrombocythemia myelofibrosis (post-ET MF) and previously treated with ruxolitinib. The primary objective of the study is to evaluate the percentage of subjects with at least 35% spleen volume reduction in the fedratinib and the BAT arms.
This study was to assess the antitumor activity, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of the Mesenchymal-epithelial Transition Factor (MET) inhibitor tepotinib combined with the 3rd generation EGFR inhibitor osimertinib in participants with advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).
Treatment with PF-06741086 is anticipated to demonstrate a clinically relevant advantage and/or a major contribution to patient care in comparison to current methods of treatment for hemophilia A or B because it works differently than factor replacement products and will work in the presence of inhibitors. The potential for once weekly (QW) subcutaneous (SC) administration provides for treatment options in the absence of reliable vascular access, increased convenience and may enable better compliance. Combined, these qualities should result in a reduction of bleeding episodes.
This is a study of perioperative pembrolizumab or enfortumab vedotin in combination with pembrolizumab in participants who are cisplatin-ineligible or decline cisplatin with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC). The primary hypothesis is that perioperative pembrolizumab plus radical cystectomy (RC) plus pelvic lymph node dissection (PLND) and perioperative enfortumab vedotin in combination with pembrolizumab plus RC+PLND will achieve superior event-free survival (EFS) compared with RC+PLND alone. With Amendment 5, outcome measures for programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) combined positive score (CPS) were removed. With Amendment 8, the primary outcome measure of pathologic complete response (pCR) rates was changed to a secondary outcome measure.
The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) plus pembrolizumab (MK-3475) in the treatment of adult participants with unresected stage I or II (Stage IIB N0, M0) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The primary study hypothesis is SBRT plus pembrolizumab prolongs Event-free Survival (EFS) compared to SBRT plus placebo (normal saline solution).