ANZCTR search results

During surgery, anaesthetists can use an endotracheal tube (ETT) to facilitate ventilation. At emergence from general anaesthesia, there are two techniques for removal of the ETT: (1) the ETT is removed when the child is waking up in (awake removal); or (2) the ETT is removed while still under anaesthesia(deep removal). Currently there is no evidence to suggest either technique is safer - deep removal of the ETT may decrease the risk of overall airway complications, including cough and desaturations. However, it may be associated with increased airway obstruction compared with awake extubation in paediatric patients. In our institution, a further technique has become increasingly common practice: removing ETT deep to avoid coughing and desaturation, then inserting a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) which can be removed once the patient is awake in the postoperative care unit (PACU), avoiding the risk of airway obstruction coupled with deep airway removal. The aim of the study is to assess whether deep removal of an ETT and exchange to an LMA, is superior to awake ETT removal with regards to the occurrence of postoperative respiratory adverse events. In this study, patients will be randomised to awake removal of ETT or deep removal of an ETT and exchange to an LMA. Data will be collected regarding the rate of respiratory adverse events in either group, as well as the incidence of post-operative pain, delirium and nausea and vomiting.

The primary purpose of this study is to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-tumor activity of TLN-372 as a single agent and in combination with other anti-tumor agents, in patients with advanced KRAS mutant solid tumors

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of povetacicept in participants with primary membranous nephropathy (pMN).

This is a combination study of Tebentafusp and the PI3Kdelta inhibitor, Roginolisib

The goal of this 2-part clinical trial is to learn about the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of a single dose of BB-025 when given on its own and after being given BB-031. Researchers will compare BB-025 to placebo (a look-alike substance that contains no drug) both on its own and after being given a single dose of BB-031 to assess the use of BB-025 as a reversal agent. In the first part of the study, participants will receive a single dose of BB-025 or placebo. They will be followed for 28 days to check if they have any symptoms. In the second part of the study, participants will receive a single dose of BB-031 and then be given either BB-025 or placebo. These participants will also be followed for 28 days to check if they have any symptoms.

This study is being conducted to find out how safe and effective different strategies of infection prevention are in comparison to each other, for preventing infection in patients with blood cancers. The best way to find out this information is to directly compare the effect of different treatment strategies in patients with blood cancers. We want to know how these different treatments impact on your health and your use of healthcare services. This research project uses an Adaptive Platform Design. This design allows the researchers to compare multiple infection prevention strategies within the same trial at the same time (rather than running separate trials), to analyse results as the trial occurs and to add new research questions during the course of the trial. The treatments that you may receive as part of the study will be determined by which domain(s) of the platform you participate in. By combining data collected within each domain as part of the platform, the researchers can investigate and compare treatment strategies and infection outcomes across a broader range of participants.

This study is being conducted to find out how safe and effective different strategies of infection prevention are in comparison to each other, for preventing infection in patients with blood cancers. The best way to find out this information is to directly compare the effect of different treatment strategies in patients with blood cancers. We want to know how these different treatments impact on your health and your use of healthcare services. This research project uses an Adaptive Platform Design. This design allows the researchers to compare multiple infection prevention strategies within the same trial at the same time (rather than running separate trials), to analyse results as the trial occurs and to add new research questions during the course of the trial. The treatments that you may receive as part of the study will be determined by which domain(s) of the platform you participate in. By combining data collected within each domain as part of the platform, the researchers can investigate and compare treatment strategies and infection outcomes across a broader range of participants.

This study is being conducted to find out how safe and effective different strategies of infection prevention are in comparison to each other, for preventing infection in patients with blood cancers. The best way to find out this information is to directly compare the effect of different treatment strategies in patients with blood cancers. We want to know how these different treatments impact on your health and your use of healthcare services. This research project uses an Adaptive Platform Design. This design allows the researchers to compare multiple infection prevention strategies within the same trial at the same time (rather than running separate trials), to analyse results as the trial occurs and to add new research questions during the course of the trial. The treatments that you may receive as part of the study will be determined by which domain(s) of the platform you participate in. By combining data collected within each domain as part of the platform, the researchers can investigate and compare treatment strategies and infection outcomes across a broader range of participants.

This is an adaptive platform study to find out how safe and effective different strategies are in comparison to each other, for preventing infection in patients with blood cancers. It is a comparison between Immunoglobulin and antibiotics use.

This study is open to people aged 40 years or older who have at least 1 family member with pulmonary fibrosis. Pulmonary fibrosis is a condition where lung tissue becomes scarred, making it harder to breathe. People can join if a lung scan shows early changes in the lung, called interstitial lung abnormalities, which may lead to lung scarring. People with family members who have pulmonary fibrosis are more likely to develop it themselves. That is why it is important to check early for lung changes and find ways to prevent the condition from getting worse. The purpose of this study is to find out whether a medicine called nerandomilast can help slow down changes in the lung in people with a family history of pulmonary fibrosis. Participants are put into one of 2 groups randomly, which means the group is chosen by chance. One group takes nerandomilast tablets, and the other group takes placebo tablets. Placebo tablets look like nerandomilast tablets but do not contain any medicine. Participants take a tablet twice a day for about 2 to 3 years. There is a 3 out of 5 chance that participants will receive nerandomilast instead of the placebo. Participants are in the study for about 2 to 3 years. Participants visit the study site multiple times: more frequently during the first 2 years (about every 3 months), and then every 6 months thereafter. In the 3rd year, participants also have phone calls with the site staff every 3 months. Doctors regularly test lung function and take chest scans to see if the treatment works. The results are compared between the 2 groups to see if nerandomilast helps. The doctors also check participants' health and take note of any unwanted effects.