linjc16/ctgov huggingface dataset:
A Comparison of Measurements of Peripheral Tissue Oxygenation by NONIN EQUANOX 7600, INVOS 5100c, and FORE-SIGHT

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
A comparison of three different devices using near infrared spectroscopy to measure the regional oxygenation. Both absolute values, reproducibility of measurements and sensitivity to changes will be estimated. The study hypothesis is that NONIN EQUANOX 7600 with sensor Model 8004CA, INVOS 5100c with sensor SAFB-SM and FORE-SIGHT with medium sensor have similar characteristics.

Conditions
-----------------
Near Infrared Spectroscopy

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: Peripheral near infrared spectroscopy


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Adult Double skin fold less than 1 cm on the lower arm Exclusion Criteria: Chronic diseases

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Healthy adults<br> | Device: Peripheral near infrared spectroscopy<br>* Devices: NONIN 7600 EQUANOX with sensor Model 8004CA, INVOS 5100c with SAFB-SM, and FORE-SIGHT with medium sensor<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Absolute mean value of peripheral regional tissue oxygenation (rStO2) in percent |  | 3 hours | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Reproducibility of measurement of peripheral regional tissue oxygenation (rStO2) in percent |  | 3 hours | 
| Sensitivity to changes in peripheral regional tissue oxygenation (rStO2) in percent |  | 3 hours |
A Controlled Trial to Evaluate the Benefits of CrossFit in People Who Work Predominantly in a Sedentary Manner.

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
People who predominantly sit down often suffer from spinal complaints. This is mainly caused or intensified by a lack of exercise and a shortened posterior muscle chain. This study aims to investigate whether CrossFit can improve physical deficits, reduce pain, and improve quality of life. For this purpose, 30 test persons should take part in regular CrossFit training twice a week over one year. In addition, as a control group, 30 persons are also observed who exercise according to their ideas.

Official Title
-----------------
MedXFit Intervention for Predominantly Seated People

Conditions
-----------------
People With Predominantly Sedentary Work

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Behavioral: CrossFit


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Predominantly sedentary work Willingness to participate in CrossFit training Exclusion Criteria: Medical reasons against participating in regular exercise Acute severe injuries to the musculoskeletal system (e.g. broken bones, torn tendons)

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 65 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Other
Allocation: Non-Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: CrossFit training<br>CrossFit training twice a week. | Behavioral: CrossFit<br>* CrossFit training<br>|
| No Intervention: Control arm<br>Exercise according to their ideas. | |

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Mobility | Changes in the Functional Movement Screen (FMS) according to Cook G. et al.; Int J Sports Phys Ther, 2014. FMS has a range from 0 -21 (0 = worst, 21 = best). | 1 year | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Strength Symmetry | Strength was assessed in kg using the Dr. WOLFF BackCheck® 617 (BC). The BC allows to measure maximum isometric strength. Furthermore, it provides reference data to evaluate strength and strength symmetry values on a scale ranging from 0 - 10 (0 = worst, 10 = best) | 1 year | 
| Strength | Strength was assessed in kg using the Dr. WOLFF BackCheck® 617 (BC). | 1 year | 
| Subjective Well-Being | Subjective Well-Being was measured with the World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5). WHO-5 has a range from 0 -25 (0 = worst, 25 = best). | 1 year |
Precision Medicine for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis Guided by Multi-omics Data Under the Umbrella Theory

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
In order to more accurately discover the cause of drug resistance in tumor treatment, and to provide a new basis for precise treatment. Therefore, based on the umbrella theory of precision medicine, we carried out this single-center, prospective, and observational study to include patients with liver metastases from colorectal cancer. By combining genome, transcriptome, and proteomic sequencing data, we established a basis for colorectal cancer liver Transfer the multi-omics data of the sample, describe the reason for the resistance of the first-line treatment, and search for new therapeutic targets.

Official Title
-----------------
Precision Medicine for Colorectal Cancer Liver Metastasis Guided by Multi-omics Data Under the Umbrella Theory

Conditions
-----------------
Colorectal Cancer Metastatic

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Diagnostic Test: Multi-omics


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: ECOG score 0-2 points Pathologically diagnosed patients with colorectal cancer Combined with liver metastases confirmed by imaging, and the lesion is measurable (RECIST standard) The lesion is available First-line treatment failed; hematology, liver and kidney function tests are suitable for back-line treatment Informed consent Exclusion Criteria: With brain metastases History of other malignancies Pregnancy or breastfeeding Have received other drug clinical studies within 30 days before the start of this study

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 70 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Multiomics arm<br>Guide therapy based on multi-omics | Diagnostic Test: Multi-omics<br>* Use multi-omics to analyze<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Objective response rate | Refers to the proportion of patients whose tumors have shrunk to a certain amount and maintained for a certain period of time, including complete remission (CR) and partial remission (PR) cases | 1 year | 

Secondary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| progression-free survival | Refers to the date from initial diagnosis to tumor progression | 1 year | 
| Overall survival | Refers to the date from initial diagnosis to last follow-up or death date | 3 years |
National Inferior Vena Cava (IVC) Filter Registry

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Inferior vena cava (IVC) filter is an important therapeutic device used in the management of venous thrombo-embolism (VTE) in patients that are contra-indicated for anti-coagulation therapy. While there has been significant increase in the use of filters , unfortunately there are no standardized collection of data to track, compare outcomes, report safety and efficacy.

Detailed Description
-----------------
The registry is a multi-institutional bioinformatics database for the collection of data relevant to Inferior vena cava filters. Participating study centers may enroll patients and enter data in the web-based registry that include demographics, clinical features, management details and follow-up up to 48 months. The purpose of this study is to improve our understanding of the retrieval rate, long term safety and efficacy on IVC filters placed in North America.

Official Title
-----------------
IVC Filter Study to Monitor and Measure Patients Outcomes Through Standardized Collection and Analysis of Clinical Information

Conditions
-----------------
Venous Thrombo-embolism

Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Data obtained in line with good clinical practice,applicable laws and regulation

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------
What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Integrity of IVC Filter 12 months post placement |  | 48 Months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
VTE, Inferior vena cava, Venous thrombo-embolism, Outcome data, IVC Filters
HeartLight Guided - Pure Pulmonary Vein Isolation Regardless of Concomitant Atrial Substrate

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Aim of the present prospective, single-centre study is to determine the outcome after pure PVI using HeartLight™ in 100 patients with different extents of LA-LVA. The latter will be assessed by an electro-anatomical voltage map using a commercial 3D mapping system (CARTO, Biosense Webster).

Detailed Description
-----------------
The ablation strategy for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and concomitant atrial substrate (e.g. low-voltage areas; LVA) is a matter of controversy. Results of studies investigating the impact of LVA may have been confounded by PV-to-left-atrial (LA) reconnection due to non-durable ablation. Therefore, the true contribution of LA-LVA to AF recurrences remains unknown. Meanwhile, new ablation technologies such as the HeartLight™ laser balloon (LB) ablation system providing near complete chronic PVI rates have been developed. Aim of the present prospective, single-centre study is to determine the outcome after pure PVI using HeartLight™ in 100 patients with different extents of LA-LVA. The latter will be assessed by an electro-anatomical voltage map using a commercial 3D mapping system (CARTO, Biosense Webster).

Official Title
-----------------
HeartLight Guided - Pure Pulmonary Vein Isolation Regardless of Concomitant Atrial Substrate

Conditions
-----------------
Atrial Fibrillation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Device: PVI with HeartLight


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Symptomatic atrial fibrillation Left atrial size <50mm Left ventricular ejection fraction <45% Patient is able to provide informed consent Exclusion Criteria: Contraindications for PVI Previous PVI attempts Inability to be treated with oral anticoagulation Presence of intracardiac thrombi Pregnancy Participation in other clinical studies Unwilling to follow the study protocol and to attend follow-up visits

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Other: Treatment<br>PVI with HeartLight | Device: PVI with HeartLight<br>* Catheter ablation<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Freedom from atrial fibrillation and atrial tachyarrhythmias | 72h Holter-ECG recordings will be performed. In case of clinical arrhythmia symptoms event-recording will be provided. | 12 months |
Ultrasound Guidance Versus Anatomical Landmarks for CVC Catheterisation:

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
anatomical landmarks on the body surface were used to insert central vein catheter. However, ultrasound technique is emerging as a new technique for vein catheterisation. For subclavian and femoral vein catheterisation, up to now, there is a lack of evidence of the superiority of one technique over the other.

Official Title
-----------------
Ultrasound Guidance Versus Anatomical Landmarks for Succlavic and Femoral Vein Catheterisation: an Observational Prospective Study

Conditions
-----------------
Success Rate for Subclavian or Femoral Vein Catetherisation

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Procedure: Central vein catheterisation


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: patients needing CVC Exclusion Criteria: refusal of consent

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| ultrasound<br>CVC insertion using ultrasound | Procedure: Central vein catheterisation<br>* ultrasound guided versus landmark central vein catheterisation<br>|
| landmark technique<br>CVC insertion using landmark technique | Procedure: Central vein catheterisation<br>* ultrasound guided versus landmark central vein catheterisation<br>|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| The success rate for succlavic or femoral vein catetherisation using ultrasound versus landmark technique at the first attempt | success rate | during catheterization procedure |
Simvastatin Treatment of Pachyonychia Congenita

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
Simvastatin and related statins, such as compactin, are able to inhibit the constitutive expression of inducible/repressible keratin genes such as K6a and K17. This effect is due to the reported ability of statins to inhibit STAT1 expression (Lee et al., 2007). The constitutive K6a promoter activity is dependent on STAT1 and blocked by simvastatin or siRNA against STAT1. This STAT1-dependent constitutive expression of K6a, is independent of JAK (Janus family of kinases). Thus simvastatin is capable of down-regulating both the constitutive and interferon-inducible expression of PC-related keratins such as K6a and K17. Therefore, this class of molecule has potential for the treatment of PC or related inherited disorders where the causative mutation resides in an inducible/repressible keratin gene such as K6a or K17. Simvastatin or other statins approved for human use might be delivered either orally, as is currently the case for cholesterol-lowering treatment or, if higher therapeutic doses are required in skin for reduction of hyperkeratosis in PC or in related keratinizing disorders, this might be achieved by topical formulations.

Official Title
-----------------
Simvastatin Treatment of Pachyonychia Congenita

Conditions
-----------------
Pachyonychia Congenita

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Simvastatine


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with pachyonychia congenita with known mutations in keratin 6a. - Exclusion Criteria: The use of concomitant medications known to interact with simvastatin. This would include itraconazole, ketoconazole, fluconazole, gemfibrozil, verapamil, diltiazem, mibefradil, erythromycin, clarithromycin, telithromycin, cyclosporine, ritonavir, nefazodone, danazol, amiodarone, Rifampin, and carbamazepine. During the study subjects must agree to avoid grapefruit juice. Also excluded are patients with a past history of myopathy, or impaired liver function.

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Intervention/Treatment |
| --- |
|Drug: Simvastatine|80 mg|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Assessment of decreased hyperkeratosis | Decreased hyperkeratosis | six months |
Pilot Study of Maintenance Therapy With Intravenous AMANTADINE

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This is a pilot study for Maintenance Intravenous Treatment with AMANTADINE in patient with PARKINSON'S Disease who are not well balanced with medical treatment.

Official Title
-----------------
Maintenance Therapy of Intravenous Amantadine in Patients With Idiopathic Parkinson Disease Who Are Not Optimally Treated With Anti Parkinson Medications

Conditions
-----------------
Parkinson Disease

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Amantadine


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Patients with idiopathic Parkinson disease Age<80 Patients with no motor improvement under optimal treatment with anti parkinson medications Patients with moderate to severe dyskinesias Patients with PD with side effects who can not tolerate anti parkinson medications Exclusion Criteria: Age>80 Patients with Parkinson syndromes, vascular parkinsonism or drug-induced parkinsonism Patients with PD who developed adverse reactions to oral amantadine Contraindication of amantadine treatment

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 30 Years
Maximum Age: 80 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
No

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Non-Randomized
Intervention Model: Single Group Assignment
Masking: None (Open Label)


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Treatment<br>IV amantadine treatment | Drug: Amantadine<br>* Initiation: IV amantadine 200mg/500ml * 1/d for 3 days Maintenance: IV amantadine 200mg/500ml once per 6 weeks for 6 months<br>* Other names: PK-Merz;|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Improvement of UPDRS scores after 6 months of treatment |  | 6 months | 
| Improvement of dyskinesias score. |  | 6 months | 

 Terms related to the study
=================
Keywords Provided by Centre Hospitalier Valida
-----------------
amantadine, parkinson disease, dyskinesia
Clinical Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of Neuronox and Botox With Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines

Study Overview
=================
Brief Summary
-----------------
This clinical study evaluates the efficacy and safety of Neuronox compared with Botox in adults with moderate to severe glabellar lines.

Detailed Description
-----------------
Subjects are randomly assigned into the two groups at the ratio of 2:1. The purpose of study is to confirm the non-inferiority of Neuronox to Botox in terms of the efficacy and safety in subjects with moderate to severe glabellar lines.

Official Title
-----------------
A Multicenter, Double-blind, Randomized, Parallel, Active-controlled, Phase III Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of NEURONOX® vs. BOTOX® in Patients With Moderate to Severe Glabellar Lines

Conditions
-----------------
Glabellar Lines

Intervention / Treatment
-----------------
* Drug: Neuronox
* Drug: Botox


Participation Criteria
=================
Eligibility Criteria
-----------------
Inclusion Criteria: Subjects aged between 18 and 65 Subjects with more than grade 2 (moderate) in the investigator's rating of the severity of glabellar lines at maximum frown Exclusion Criteria: Subjects with medical conditions who may be greater risk due to the administration of the investigational drugs Subjects with skin disorders at the injection site

Ages Eligible for Study
-----------------
Minimum Age: 18 Years
Maximum Age: 65 Years

Sexes Eligible for Study
-----------------
All

Accepts Healthy Volunteers
-----------------
Accepts Healthy Volunteers

Study Plan
=================
How is the study designed?
-----------------

Design Details

Primary Purpose: Treatment
Allocation: Randomized
Intervention Model: Parallel Assignment
Masking: Double


Arms and Interventions

| Participant Group/Arm | Intervention/Treatment |
| --- | --- |
| Experimental: Neuronox<br>Botulinum toxin type A for Injection | Drug: Neuronox<br> <br> * Other names: Clostridium Botulinum Toxin A 100 U;|
| Active Comparator: Botox<br>Botulinum toxin type A for Injection | Drug: Botox<br> <br> * Other names: Clostridium Botulinum Toxin A 50 U;|

What is the study measuring?
-----------------
Primary Outcome Measures

| Outcome Measure | Measure Description | Time Frame |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 4-grade scale by live assessment of glabellar line severity | Glabellar line improvement rate at maximum frown | 4 weeks after injection |