La Jarrie, France

Pericardiotomy in Cardiac Surgery

Approximately 30% of cardiac surgical patients develop post-operative atrial fibrillation (POAF). Its incidence varies depending on the type of cardiac operation. POAF is associated with short- and long-term adverse events, including mortality, stroke, and heart failure. POAF has also been significantly associated with unplanned hospitalization for heart failure. During cardiac surgery, pericardial fluid tends to collect posterior to the left atrium. Even small amounts of fluid may trigger atrial arrhythmias. A posterior left pericardiotomy is a surgical procedure that involves cauterizing an opening between the left inferior pulmonary vein and the diaphragm. This procedure may allow for more prolonged drainage of the pericardial fluid into the left pleural space. Recent research evidence found that posterior pericardiotomy was associated with a significantly lower incidence of POAF. The existing data on posterior pericardiotomy is promising for a reduction in POAF. However, no high-quality study has demonstrated that this reduction improves clinical outcomes in the years after cardiac surgery. The PRINCE trial's long-term follow-up of patients randomized to left posterior pericardiotomy could conclusively demonstrate whether the relationship of POAF to post-discharge clinical outcomes is causal and modifiable. The PRINCE trial will evaluate the effectiveness and safety of posterior left pericardiotomy in preventing POAF and improving post-discharge clinical outcomes in a broad spectrum of cardiac surgery patients. The intervention under investigation is left posterior pericardiotomy which is compared to no posterior pericardiotomy during cardiac surgery. The early co-primary outcome is in-hospital POAF, and the late co-primary outcome is the hierarchical composite of time to all-cause death, time to ischemic stroke, time to systemic arterial embolism, time to unplanned hospital visit/readmission for cardiac reasons, and time to atrial fibrillation after index hospital discharge. The study will enrol 1400 patients from 30 centres, globally. Follow-up visits will be performed in person or by telephone 1 and 6 months post-randomization (+7 days), and then every 6 months (+30 days) until an average follow-up of 5 years for the study participants (estimated to be 4 years after completion of enrolment).

Virtual Reality and Neurostimulation for Early Stroke Rehabilitation

A Multicenter Study on Atrioventricular Regurgitation in Transthyretin Amyloid Cardiomyopathy: Definition, Prevalence, and Prognostic Impact.

CCSV - Post Market Clinical Follow-up Study

Rollover Study for Participants Previously Enrolled in Clinical Trials of Povorcitinib

The Dragon PLC Trial (DRAGON-PLC)

Primary liver cancer (PLC) is the third most common cause of cancer death worldwide. Surgical resection is the mainstay for a curative approach as contemporary chemotherapy and immune-based therapies only lead to a median survival of 10-14 months. A complete surgical resection increases the median survival to 42 months (range 32-52 months). However, PLC is mainly diagnosed at an advanced stage and >70% of PLC patients are ineligible for an immediate surgical approach. There are different reasons that make a patient ineligible for surgery, one important reason is the risk of liver failure after the surgery due to a small remnant liver. This study aims to improve the oncological, radiological and surgical strategy to allow more patients to undergo liver resection safely, to improve quality of life and to extend overall survival at acceptable costs. Adequate function of the future liver remnant (FLR) is a prerequisite for surgical resectability. This is necessary in order to avoid liver failure after surgery, a major cause of morbidity (38%) and mortality (27%). To mitigate this risk, regenerative strategies based on preoperative calculation of the FLR volume and function are essential. Patients with technically resectable disease but predicted insufficient FLR volume or function are referred to as primarily unresectable or potentially resectable (PU/PR). These patients can undergo strategies that capitalize on the regenerative capacity of the liver which aim to preoperatively increase the FLR volume and function in order to allow surgery. Many of the patients that are primarily unresectable due to an insufficient FLR can become ultimately and safely resectable after the induction of adequate FLR-hypertrophy by the current standard, portal vein embolisation (PVE). However, 25% of patients do not show sufficient FLR growth after PVE and are unable to safely undergo resection. A new approach has been developed to improve this. Combined portal and hepatic vein embolisation (PVE/HVE) has great promise in terms of increasing FLR growth, resection rate (RR), safety and potentially, overall survival. Establishing PVE/HVE as the new standard could result in increased survival and a better quality of life (QoL) for patients.

Efficacy of Torque Teno Virus as a Biomarker for Predicting Treatment Response of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy and Postoperative Outcome in NSCLC Patients

Clinical Study to Predict the Risk of Bone Fractures With the POROUS Ultrasound Device

Background and purpose: Currently, osteoporosis and fracture risk are indirectly evaluated via the assessment of risk factors and bone mineral density (BMD) measurement. Although BMD is currently the most important indicator for osteoporosis-associated bone fractures, most of those fractures occur in persons who do not show pathologically reduced BMD value. Therefore, osteoporosis is one of the most frequently underdiagnosed common diseases. Established guidelines for the diagnosis of osteoporosis recommend the assessment of fracture risk factors and the T-Score, which is derived from the measurement of areal bone mineral density (aBMD) by means of DXA at major fracture sites, i.e., spine and proximal femur. DXA is regarded as the "gold standard" well-established methodology to determine aBMD for diagnostic purposes. Epidemiological data emphasize the urgency of developing diagnostic tools that can improve fracture risk prediction so that patients can be treated with the appropriate anti-osteoporotic therapies. Current guidelines for diagnosis and treatment lead to treatment gaps. It is estimated that at least 80% of males and 77% of females who would benefit from osteoporosis treatment are neither diagnosed nor treated in Germany. Device description: The POROUS R3C ultrasound device enables a non-invasive, non-ionizing quantitative detection of microstructural bone changes. As opposed to diagnosis based on a combination of clinical risk factors and a relative decrease of BMD, the novel device enables detecting pathological changes of bone microstructure at an earlier timepoint as well as monitoring such changes in a longitudinal manner. In the course of this clinical investigation, data will be collected to establish relevant ultrasound-based physical biomarkers for the prediction of fracture risk. Study design: This is a single-cohort, multicenter, prospective, age- and sex-stratified study in participants > 55 years of age. In this study, Baseline data will be collected to establish a corrected standardized gradient of fracture risk using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device and test its performance in predicting fracture risk. Further, the performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device in the analysis of cortical bone properties and discrimination of prevalent fractures will be assessed. Participants will be enrolled into different groups based on their age (consisting of five-year bands), sex (males and females), and risk status for hip and vertebral fractures (i.e., high risk of ≥ 2-fold and low risk of < 2-fold increased risk compared to the general population of the same age and sex). Two measurements with each device: investigational device (POROUS R3C ultrasound device at the midshaft tibia), and comparator (DXA of the lumbar spine and proximal femur), are scheduled per participant: - Measurement 1: At Baseline - Measurement 2: At the End-of-Study (EoS) visit. Study Part 1: In Part 1, information on prevalent fractures will be used to establish a corrected standardized gradient of fracture risk using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device. In other words, Part 1 aims to establish the discriminative performance and a standardized gradient of fracture risk based on prevalent fractures. In addition, the discriminative performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device and standard-of-care DXA will be compared based on prevalent fractures. Study Part 2: In Part 2, information on incident fractures will be used to establish a corrected standardized gradient of fracture risk using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device. It will be developed to demonstrate the predictive performance of the derived fracture risk. In other words, Part 2 aims to establish a standardized gradient of fracture risk based on incident fractures. In addition, the predictive performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device and standard-of-care DXA will be compared based on incident fractures. The collection of data obtained by DXA and the POROUS R3C device at the EoS visit is used to monitor changes in the bone state in comparison to the respective data obtained at Baseline. However, only measurement data obtained by the POROUS R3C device at Baseline is used to develop the POROUS-Score model and the standardized gradient of fracture risk (for Part 1 and Part 2). Primary objectives: - Part 1 -To establish a corrected standardized gradient of fracture risk using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on prevalent fractures. - Part 2 - To establish a corrected standardized gradient of fracture risk using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on incident fractures and to demonstrate the predictive performance of the derived fracture risk. Secondary objectives: - Part 1 - To compare the discriminative performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device and standard-of-care DXA based on prevalent fractures. - Part 2 - To assess the safety of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device by monitoring adverse events affecting participants or the healthcare professionals using the device. - Part 2 - To compare the predictive performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device and standard-of-care DXA based on incident fractures. Exploratory objectives: - Part 1 - To assess the association of various ultrasound parameters measured by the POROUS R3C ultrasound device with specific clinical risk factors/indicators for vertebral and hip fractures (as outlined by the DVO) and prevalent fractures. - Part 1 - To demonstrate the discriminative performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on subgroups of prevalent fractures, e.g., hip, vertebral, and major osteoporotic fractures. - Part 1 - To establish reference data for developing age-adjusted POROUS Z-scores using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on prevalent fractures. - Part 2 - To assess the association of various ultrasound parameters measured by the POROUS R3C ultrasound device with specific clinical risk factors/indicators for vertebral and hip fractures (as outlined by the DVO) and incident fractures. - Part 2 - To demonstrate the predictive performance of the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on subgroups of incident fractures, e.g., hip, vertebral, and major osteoporotic fractures. - Part 2 - To establish reference data for developing age-adjusted POROUS Z-scores using the POROUS R3C ultrasound device based on incident fractures. - Part 2 - To explore the treatment effect of anti-osteoporotic medication - Part 2 - To explore the treatment effect of drugs known to influence bone metabolism. Participants: A total of 1,600 female and male participants (> 55 years of age) will be included in the investigation. This population is planned to include 1,120 participants with ≥ 2-fold increased age- and sex-adjusted risk for hip and vertebral fractures and 480 participants with a < 2-fold increased age- and sex-adjusted risk for hip and vertebral fractures. Stratification of participants, fracture risk < 2-fold increased risk: - Age group 56-60, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. - Age group 61-65, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. - Age group 66-70, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. - Age group 71-75, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. - Age group 76-80, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. - Age group 81-85, males/females = 40 per group, total = 80. Stratification of participants, fracture risk ≥ 2-fold increased risk: - Age group 66-70, females = 100 per group. - Age group 71-75, males = 100 per group, females = 160 per group, total = 260. - Age group 76-80, males/females = 180 per group, total = 360. - Age group 81-85, males/females = 200 per group, total = 400. The expected number of incident fractures* ~140 (at 24 months), ~210 (at 36 months). *The assumed number of fractures per analysis group (DXA and POROUS R3C) at Month 24 and Month 36, respectively, is based on age- and sex-matched incidence rates for fractures (Rupp et al., Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 2021), further updated by data on the incidence of vertebral fractures (Fink et al., JBMR, 2005). Risk calculation for hip and vertebral fractures: At Screening, assessment of clinical risk factors and application of risk calculating scheme as outlined in the Dachverband Osteologie (DVO, tri-national umbrella association of German, Austrian, and Swiss medical and scientific professional societies in the field of bone diseases) osteoporosis guideline will determine whether a participant is at increased risk (≥ 2-fold compared to the general population of the same age and sex) for hip and vertebral fractures. Please note that the calculation of the pertinent risk as performed in this study does not include any DXA-based BMD measurements and T-Scores. No DXA BMD measurement or DXA-based vertebral fracture assessment (VFA) will be conducted at Screening. Noteworthy, DXA-based BMD measurement results and T-Scores will be included in the different analyses of the study endpoints but not for the risk calculation at Screening as described above. Screened and eligible individuals will be enrolled in the investigation until the necessary sample size for his/her corresponding group (based on age, sex, and risk status) has been reached (see Table below). To avoid over-recruiting, once the necessary sample size for one group has been reached, no further individuals with matching age band, sex, and risk status will be enrolled in the study. Duration of the study: The planned overall clinical investigation is expected to take 48 months, including an enrolment period of approximately 12 months and a clinical investigation period of 36 months. Per participant, the total time of participation in the investigation will take 36 months. 20 months (+/-1 month) after the first participant has been included in the investigation, a checkpoint assessment of the number of fracture events so far recorded is planned. The aim is to assess whether the number of fractures projected to be reached after each participant will have been followed-up for 24 months would be sufficient for a test of the primary endpoint with sufficient statistical power. If this is the case, the clinical investigation period will be shortened to 24 months (correspondingly, the overall duration will be shortened to 36 months). If, at the checkpoint assessment, the number of fractures is insufficient, the follow-up period will remain as planned and the EoS visit will take place at 36 months, amounting to the originally planned overall duration of 48 months. Duration of participation: The total time of participation in the investigation will take 36 months per participant, with the option to be shortened to an investigational period of 24 months based on the results of a checkpoint assessment of reported fractures scheduled at Month 20 (+/-1 month). Fracture risk prediction model: The diagnostic value of physical biomarkers, which are derived from Baseline measurements with the POROUS R3C ultrasound device, will be assessed, and selected physical biomarkers will be integrated into a model, resulting in a composite POROUS-Score, for fracture risk prediction. In Part 1, the model will be developed using data on prevalent fractures, while in Part 2, the model will be developed using data on incident fractures. The resulting POROUS-Scores are, therefore, different in Part 1 and Part 2. In Part 1, it is termed POROUS-Score(Prev), whereas in Part 2, it is termed POROUS-Score. Additionally, anthropometric data (age, sex, and BMI) will be evaluated and selected for adding predictive strength to the prediction model. Part 1: Prevalent fractures will be recorded, and all relevant variables, including ultrasound parameter values and anthropometric information, will be used to perform partial least squares - discriminant analysis (PLS-DA) followed by subwindow permutation analysis using a Monte-Carlo approach. Only variables that have statistically significant discriminative power will be used in the next step, where a new fracture discrimination model will be created using PLS-DA analysis. Thereafter, the performance of the model will be investigated using receiver operating characteristics (ROC) analysis. More precisely, logistic discriminant analysis will be performed. Area under the curve (AUC) values and their confidence intervals will be computed from ROC curves for each model. Internal validation of the model will be performed by using cross-validation followed by bootstrap analysis. Odds ratios will be determined for both the final composite POROUS-Score(Prev) (generated from the internally validated model) and DXA T-Score. Standardized odds ratios (sOR) will be calculated, i.e., the fold-increase of the relative fracture risk per standard deviation decrease of the respective score. The discriminative ability of the POROUS model for prevalent fractures is demonstrated if the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval of the corrected sOR is higher than 1. Part 2: Incident fractures will be recorded, and all relevant variables, including ultrasound parameter values and anthropometric information, will be used to perform PLSDA followed by sub-window permutation analysis using a Monte-Carlo approach. Only variables that have statistically significant predictive power will be used in the next step, where a multivariate Cox-proportional Hazard model will be performed to calculate the hazard ratio (HR). Then, the model performance will be investigated using ROC analysis. Internal validation of the model will be done by running cross-validation followed by Bootstrap analysis. The standardized relative risk (sRR) will be calculated, i.e., the fold-increase of the relative fracture risk per standard deviation decrease of the respective score. The sRR will be determined for both the final composite POROUS-Score (generated from the internally validated model) and DXA T-Score. The predictive ability of the POROUS model for incident fractures is demonstrated if the lower limit of the 90% confidence interval of the corrected sRR is higher than 1. Clinical procedures: The following clinical procedures are performed during the investigation: Screening - Informed consent - Inclusion/exclusion criteria - Calculation of individual risk for hip and vertebral fractures as per modified version of the DVO risk calculation scheme (excluding DXA-based BMD measurement and T-Score) - Enrolment into corresponding age-sex-risk group. Baseline (Visit 2, 0-14 days after Screening) - Scanning with the POROUS R3C ultrasound device at the central anteromedial tibia region - Scanning with DXA (aBMD of the lumbar spine and proximal femur). - Fracture anamnesis, including DXA-based VFA. Alternatively, VFA may be replaced by projectional radiography if VFA is not available. - Assessment of clinical risk indicators (as per DVO guideline) - Assessment of concomitant medication (initiation of anti-osteoporotic medication as well as oral glucocorticoids, proton pump inhibitors, aromatase inhibitors, hormone ablation therapy/antiandrogens in males). - Recording of adverse events. Follow-up period Interim visits (phone survey) - Visits 3-7 at Month 6, 12, 18, 24, 30 ± 14 days - Assessment of incident fractures (to be validated by requesting medical documents - X-ray images, physician's findings) - Concomitant medication assessment - Recording of adverse events Early-termination (ET) visit/phone survey Participants who withdraw early (i.e., before undergoing the EoS visit) will be offered an ET clinical visit, including - VFA (or projectional radiography of the spine, respectively, if VFA is not available) - Anamnesis of incident fractures since the last visit/phone survey - Concomitant medication assessment (see above) - Recording of adverse events. (Alternatively, the visit can be conducted as a phone survey if the time gap since the last DXA/VFA is < 6 months or the participant is not available for a clinical visit). EoS visit - Visit 8 at Month 36 ± 14 days - Scanning with the POROUS R3C ultrasound device at the central anteromedial tibia region - Scanning with DXA (aBMD of the lumbar spine and proximal femur). - Assessment of incident fractures including VFA (or projectional radiography of the spine) - Re-assessment of fracture risk factors/indicators as per DVO guideline and recalculation of risk for hip and vertebral fractures - Concomitant medication assessment - Recording of adverse events. Subgroup analysis: General subgroups for analyses are defined based on age, sex, and risk (for hip and vertebral fractures). Stratification groups are presented in the table on "Number of participants to be included in the investigation" included above. In addition, subgroup analyses are done to monitor treatment effects, as described in the exploratory endpoint of Part 2.

Balance, Autonomic Response, and Sensory Modulation to Dosage of Mechanical Vagal Stimulation in Healthy Adults

mechanical VNs in humans, induced by a combination of non-painful physiological neck movements, effectively reduces the HR at rest in humans, without any side effects in the short- and long-term. Indeed, HR reduction is a proxy for the VN increased activity among healthy subjects and patients with systemic diseases or autonomic diseases. Mechanical VNs had been successfully adopted in two clinical trials among chronic pain patients (NCT05345496, NCT05360589), but due to the early stage of these new VNs and the clear advantages of this method, studies refining the stimulation protocol are suitable. Thus, the study aims to investigate the possible dose-dependent effects of mVNs on different physiological parameters in humans. 3 protocols of mVNs will be compared consisting of (1) 4 minutes (2 minutes on each side); (2) 12 minutes (3 sessions of 2 minutes of stimulation, with 2 minutes of rest for each side); (3) 16 minutes (8 minutes on each side). The following outcomes will be assessed before and after the stimulation: HR at rest, HRV, balance on standing, perceived intensity and modulation of mechanical stimuli on the skin of the forehead, and the abdomen, gastrointestinal transit, and a fecal sample from the closest intestinal emptying. A total sample of at least 96 healthy subjects (48 females) aged between 18 and 60 are expected to participate. The bidirectional communication between internal organs and the brain via the VN is a well-established scientific fact. Indeed, VNs has beneficial effects on manifold pathological conditions in humans. However, easy-to-apply, non-invasive, and effective VNs methods and standardized protocols are lacking. The here proposed project aims at refining and critically assessing mVNs methods - a prerequisite for exploring the clinical utility of mVNs and fostering its therapeutic potential given the fundamental role of the VN in regulating health and disease. Results obtained from this project will provide data on mVNs on gut microbiota dynamics and the potential benefits for pain modulation, equilibrium impairments, and gastrointestinal dysfunctions.

Anastomotic Leakage in Right Colectomy