The efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS): multicentre, double blinded, randomised, placebo controlled, phase 3 trial

Background

Physical exercise is a cornerstone for preventing diet-induced obesity, while it is unclear whether physical exercise could offset high-fat, high-calories diet (HFCD)-induced cardiac dysfunction. Here, mice were fed with HFCD and simultaneously subjected to physical exercise. As expected, physical exercise prevented HFCD-induced whole-body fat deposition. However, physical exercise exacerbated HFCD-induced cardiac damage. Further metabolomic analysis results showed that physical exercise induced circulating lipid redistribution, leading to excessive cardiac lipid uptake and lipotoxicity. Our study provides valuable insights into the cardiac effects of exercise in mice fed with HFCD, suggesting that counteracting the negative effect of HFCD by simultaneous physical exercise might be detrimental

inappropriate physical exercise may damage certain organs even though it leads to weight loss and overall metabolic benefits. Of note, the current findings are based on animal experiments, the generalizability of these findings beyond this specific diet and mouse strain remains to be further explored.

Literature Review

A search of the published medical literature revealed 1 study investigating the researchable question:

The efficacy and safety of thymosin α1 for sepsis (TESTS): multicentre, double blinded, randomised, placebo controlled, phase 3 trial

Level of evidence

B - One high-quality study or multiple studies with limitations Read more→

Please see Table 1 for your response.

Enter title in bold, with all first words capitalized, and without a reference number
Design	Objective terms describing the type of study (randomized, uncontrolled, retrospective, placebo-controlled, cross-over, etc.); N= (total subjects)
Objective	State the objective (purpose) of the study using the author’s language(usually beginning with “To” and without a period, assuming a non-complete sentence)
Study Groups	Only the separate groups and their cohort number (n) should be listed. You can describe more details of the cohorts in the methods section so this section can stay very succinct.
Inclusion Criteria	Include relevant inclusion criteria (not a comprehensive list).
Exclusion Criteria	Include relevant exclusion criteria (not a comprehensive list).
Methods	This is our most important section. Data collection and any other information needed to understand the results is presented. Any loose ends from all other sections are tied up here, as concisely as possible.
Duration	Include the duration of the trial as a whole, as well as the duration of the interventions.
Outcome Measures	If the primary outcome measure isn’t explicit from the study, all outcome measures applicable to the inquiry can be listed in this section. If the primary outcome measure is explicit, then make separate sections for ‘Primary’ and ‘Secondary’ Outcome Measures. All outcome measures listed should correlate directly/exactly with the results presented later.
Baseline Characteristics		A	B
	Age, years
	Female
	White
	---
	Include relevant baseline characteristics that will provide a general (big picture) view of the patients in the study.
Results	Endpoint	A	B	p-Value
	----
	----
	All results listed should correlate directly/exactly with the outcome measures presented previously.Results that do not have to do with the inquiry should not be included; just the stated outcomes need corresponding results. Tables are encouraged to display the most info using the least space/words.
Adverse Events	Common Adverse Events: (or those deemed frequent; if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
	Serious Adverse Events: (or those deemed high risk; if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
	Percentage that Discontinued due to Adverse Events: (if not listed in study, use N/A or “Not disclosed”)
Study Author Conclusions	Copy and paste the author’s conclusions on the question at hand, using full sentences. Don’t include any conclusions that don’t correspond to results we list.
InpharmD Researcher Critique	As the expert, add 1-2 sentences on strengths, weaknesses, and takeaways from this study. Focus on insight as “more research is needed” is obvious.