Food retail outlets in sports and recreation facilities often fail to support healthy eating, despite aligning with healthy lifestyles and goals of local governments (LGs) that often own or manage them. LGs face barriers to implementing facility changes including inadequate staffing, training and incentives. The Promoting CHANGE initiative was co-designed to support LGs in improving and sustaining healthier food and drink offerings in these settings.

A 3-year, type 2 effectiveness-implementation hybrid cluster randomised controlled trial will evaluate the Promoting CHANGE capacity-building and support package in three Intervention and four Control LGs in Victoria, Australia (August 2023–July 2026). The co-designed initiative includes human resource support, training, tools, technical assistance, community-of-practice groups, feedback based on food outlet audit and sales data and small grant incentives. Using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) evaluation framework, the trial’s co-primary outcomes are the percentage of least healthiest food and drinks (1) displayed (implementation) and (2) sold weekly (effectiveness). Key secondary outcomes are effectiveness (sales and revenue); facility-level adoption, implementation, maintenance of healthy changes; cost-effectiveness (within-trial modelled economic evaluation). Findings will provide evidence of the initiative’s effectiveness and scalability, informing recommendations for advancing healthier food environments in over 6000 community-based food outlets across 500 Australian LGs, with implications globally.

This study has received approval from the Deakin University Human Research Ethics Committee (reference number HEAG-H 92_2023). The results will be published in scientific peer-reviewed journals along with plain language summaries for participants.

ACTRN12621001120864.

Virtual Wards (VWs) facilitate hospital-level monitoring, diagnostics and treatment within patients’ homes, while the hospital team retains responsibility for care. International research indicates that VWs decrease hospital length of stay without increasing readmissions; however, the feasibility and key operational determinants within Dutch care remain uncertain. This protocol outlines the VW for Early Discharge in Patients Receiving Inpatient Care (VIP Care) study.

The VIP Care study is a single-centre prospective feasibility cohort study conducted at Erasmus University Medical Center (Erasmus MC), Rotterdam, the Netherlands. The study encompasses seven predefined subcohorts with n=51 eligible patients per subcohort: (1) bacterial, fungal or parasitic infections; (2) viral respiratory infections; (3) dehydration; (4) decompensated heart failure; (5) high-dose corticosteroid treatment; (6) post-transsphenoidal pituitary surgery follow-up and (7) severe inflammatory skin disease with or without bacterial or viral superinfection. Adults who require hospital-level monitoring and/or therapy may qualify for early discharge to the VW.

The VW integrates scheduled, patient-performed measurements using (European Conformity) CE-marked devices with structured symptom assessment submitted via a patient application, and data review in an electronic health record-integrated clinician cockpit. Submissions are evaluated by VW tele-nurses using prespecified Early Warning Score based thresholds and an escalation protocol. Patients receive a daily physician telephone review. Diagnostics and treatments are administered at home to hospital standards through established home-care services.

The primary outcome (feasibility) is adherence to transfer, defined as the proportion of eligible inpatients who provide written informed consent and are subsequently successfully transferred to the VW. The prespecified feasibility threshold is 30%. Secondary outcomes include reach (eligibility, invitation and consent rates among admitted patients), operational performance during the VW episode (alert frequency and handling, contact volumes and actions), length of stay on the ward and in the VW, emergency department reassessments and 30-day readmissions. Qualitative interviews will be conducted to identify implementation determinants.

The study received approval from the Erasmus MC Medical Ethics Committee (MEC-2024–0060; amendment MEC-2024–0060 A0001). Incremental risk is considered minimal. Written informed consent is obtained. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, conference presentations and an accessible lay summary.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT06936891; CCMO NL85516.078.24. Recruitment began in May 2025 and is ongoing.

Gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP NET) are malignant neoplasms that impact survival. Somatostatin analogues (SSA) are used for treating hormonal symptoms caused by GEP NET and have antiproliferative effects. They are used as first-line therapy in patients with advanced GEP NET, but disease control is limited to a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of 14–32 months. Second-line treatment options include targeted therapy (everolimus or sunitinib), or peptide receptor radionuclide therapy (PRRT) with ¹⁷⁷Lu-DOTATATE. In patients suffering from a NET-related hormonal syndrome, SSA is generally continued life-long. However, there is no consensus on whether it is beneficial to continue SSA in non-functional NET upon disease progression. Due to the ongoing activity of the somatostatin receptor pathway in GEP NET progressing on first-line SSA, we hypothesise that SSA have an added efficacy in second-line therapy.

The SAUNA trial is an international, multicentre, open-label, randomised, controlled, pragmatic clinical trial. 270 patients with advanced, non-functional GEP NET and progression under first-line SSA will be included in substudy 1 (PRRT; n=142) or substudy 2 (targeted therapy (everolimus/sunitinib); n=128) per investigator’s choice of second-line therapy and will be randomised (1:1) per substudy between SSA continuation or SSA withdrawal arms. Co-primary endpoints are the difference in progression-free survival (PFS) according to the RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumours) V.1.1 criteria and difference in time to deterioration (TTD) in quality of life (QoL) per substudy after initiating second-line therapy with or without SSA. Secondary endpoints include the PFS rate at 18 months, the difference in pooled PFS and TTD combining both substudies, overall survival, response rates, QoL, costs, cost-effectiveness and toxicity. The study design was developed in cooperation with the Belgium and Dutch patient organisations.

The study has been approved on 31 May 2023 by the Ethical Committees and Regulatory Authorities of the concerned member states (EU CT number 2022-502703-30-00). Both the trial management group and the steering committee will oversee good governance of this trial. Results of the study will be published in peer-reviewed international journals and presented at international conferences.

NCT05701241.