What clinical trials attempt to treat or manage specific medical conditions?

From the Guidelines

To find clinical trials that attempt to study various medical interventions, particularly in the context of melanoma, you should visit ClinicalTrials.gov, which is the largest database of clinical trials worldwide, as noted in the most recent guideline update 1. This free resource allows you to search for trials by condition, intervention, location, and other criteria. Simply enter keywords related to your area of interest in the search bar, and you can filter results based on recruitment status, study type, and eligibility criteria. Some notable ongoing trials include:

• The EBIN trial (EORTC 1612, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03235245), a two-arm phase II trial evaluating a 3-month treatment with encorafenib plus binimetinib followed by ipilimumab plus nivolumab versus ipilimumab plus nivolumab in patients with BRAF-mutated stage III or IV unresectable melanoma.
• The STOP-GAP trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02821013) of intermittent versus continuous anti–PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma.
• The COWBOY trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02968303) investigating induction vemurafenib plus cobimetinib followed by nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with unresectable and/or metastatic BRAF V600E/K–mutated melanoma. Another excellent option is the World Health Organization's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), which aggregates trial information from multiple international registries. For more specific searches, disease-focused organizations like the American Cancer Society often maintain databases of relevant trials. University medical centers and research hospitals typically list their ongoing trials on their websites as well. When searching, be specific about your condition and consider factors like your location, as proximity to trial sites is important for participation. These resources provide comprehensive information about trial objectives, eligibility requirements, and contact information for study coordinators who can provide further details about participation. It's worth noting that while other studies, such as those on COPD 1, may discuss the importance of therapeutic trials and research questions, they are not directly relevant to the search for clinical trials on melanoma.

From the FDA Drug Label

The study evaluated meropenem at doses of 500 mg administered intravenously every 8 hours and imipenem-cilastatin at doses of 500 mg administered intravenously every 8 hours. The study compared the clinical response between treatment groups in the clinically evaluable population at the follow-up visit (test-of-cure). Four hundred forty-six patients (397 pediatric patients 3 months to less than 17 years of age) were enrolled in 4 separate clinical trials and randomized to treatment with meropenem (n=225) at a dose of 40 mg/kg every 8 hours or a comparator drug, i.e., cefotaxime (n=187) or ceftriaxone (n=34), at the approved dosing regimens. One controlled clinical study of complicated intra-abdominal infection was performed in the United States where meropenem was compared with clindamycin/tobramycin.

The clinical trials that attempt to study the effects of meropenem are:

• A study comparing meropenem to imipenem-cilastatin in patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections.
• A study comparing meropenem to cefotaxime or ceftriaxone in patients with bacterial meningitis.
• A study comparing meropenem to clindamycin/tobramycin in patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections.
• Three controlled clinical studies of complicated intra-abdominal infections were performed in Europe; meropenem was compared with imipenem (two trials) and cefotaxime/metronidazole (one trial) 2

From the Research

Clinical Trials

• The study 3 explores the optimal search approaches for clinical trials in publicly available trials registers, such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP).
• Another study 4 evaluates the completeness of ClinicalTrials.gov by comparing it to a commercial clinical trial database, Informa Pharma Intelligence's Trialtrove, and finds that Trialtrove captured 31% more clinical trials than ClinicalTrials.gov.
• The ClinicalTrials.gov results database is discussed in 5, which summarizes the structure and contents of the database and provides an update on relevant policies.
• Specific clinical trials are mentioned in 6 and 7, including a study comparing nivolumab plus ipilimumab to pembrolizumab as chemotherapy-free, first-line treatment for PD-L1-positive non-small cell lung cancer, and a network meta-analysis evaluating the efficacy of targeted therapy and/or immunotherapy with or without chemotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer.

Search Approaches

• The study 3 finds that a sensitive search approach in the basic interface of ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP retrieves the largest number of included studies.
• The use of the advanced interface in ClinicalTrials.gov and ICTRP is also discussed in 3, which finds that it maintains or improves sensitivity in most cases.
• The importance of searching both trials registers and major bibliographic databases is emphasized in 3, as trials registers cannot yet be relied upon as the sole means to locate trials for systematic reviews.

Clinical Trial Registries

• The study 4 highlights the limitations of ClinicalTrials.gov, including the variation in clinical trial site and country information for trials with identical NCT numbers.
• The ClinicalTrials.gov results database is discussed in 5, which provides an update on the structure and contents of the database and the policies surrounding it.
• The importance of accurate and informative data submission to clinical trial registries is emphasized in 5, as it affects the usefulness of the database.