View clinical trials related to Carcinoma, Renal Cell.
Filter by:This is an open label, randomized phase II trial. Eligible subjects will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio and stratified for known prognostics variables to one of two first-line medication treatment arms. Once disease progression has been documented, and following a required inter-line washout period, subjects will receive either second-line medication treatment or discontinue treatment, per discretion of treating investigator.
Metastatic (HR-positive, HER2-negative) breast cancer (BC), advanced or unresectable neuroendocrine tumours of pancreatic (pNET), gastrointestinal or lung origin and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are diseases with poor outcome. Everolimus increases patients' median progression-free survival (PFS) with 4.6 months in metastatic BC (mBC), 7 months in (p)NET and 3 months in mRCC. However, serious adverse events (AEs) occur frequently. This reduces effectiveness of everolimus, because AEs are managed with dose reductions, treatment interruptions or even complete discontinuation of everolimus. Therapeutic-drug-monitoring (TDM) is used to adjust the prescribed daily dose, to maintain effective everolimus whole blood concentrations, with the lowest possible risk of AEs. While everolimus TDM has been common in transplantation medicine, it has not been implemented in oncology. The importance of TDM in oncology is supported by previous research which showed that a 2-fold increased everolimus whole blood trough concentration was associated with a short-term risk of grade ≥ 3 pneumonitis, stomatitis and metabolic events. Moreover, an exposure-toxicity relationship of everolimus in patients with thyroid cancer was observed, since initial everolimus concentrations could be associated with early toxicity (< 12 weeks, e.g. stomatitis). However, the association between initial everolimus measurements and long-term AEs (≥12 weeks, e.g. pneumonitis, anorexia and anemia) of any grade and the need for everolimus dose reductions could not be made. Since levels ±>18 µg/L were associated with toxicity, the investigators assume that the upper therapeutic window of everolimus in the oncologic setting will be ±18 µg/L. Similarly, a tendency to improved PFS and overall survival was observed when Cmin in steady state was above 14.1 μg/L. This seems to be the lower limit of the therapeutic window. Before consensus about the feasibility of everolimus TDM in the oncologic setting can be achieved, a number of questions (the knowledge gaps) need to be answered: 1. It is unknown whether everolimus whole blood trough levels (over time) predict long-term AEs. 2. The optimal concentration range for everolimus, with the treatment of mBC, mRCC, or (p)NET is unknown, especially the upper limit associated with toxicity. 3. It is unknown what everolimus concentration level is associated with the need for everolimus dose reductions.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate safety and efficacy of different administration regimens of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in subjects with renal cell carcinoma.
This is a Phase III, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of atezolizumab versus placebo in participants with RCC who are at high risk of disease recurrence following nephrectomy.
This study will assess the immunomodulatory activity of entinostat in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving the PD-L1 inhibitor atezolizumab. The overall hypothesis is that entinostat will increase the immune response and anti-tumor effect induced by the PD-L1 inhibition by suppressing Treg function. We have chosen renal cell carcinoma that has been reported to respond to PD1/PD-L 1 inhibition. The schedule of entinostat is based on our previous experience with this agent. Based on our working hypothesis that low dose HDAC inhibitors will have a suppressive function on Tregs but not on T effector cells, the starting dose of entinostat will be 1 mg and will be escalated up to 5 mg rather than the 10 mg dose. The combination also with bevacizumab will provide an effective VEGF inhibition that may potentiate the immune response and anti-tumor effect induced by atezolizumab. The proposed dose and schedule for atezolizumab and bevacizumab has been shown to be well tolerated in prior Phase/I/II studies and is currently tested in a Phase III randomized study in patients with renal cell carcinoma with sunitinib as a control arm. The highest proposed dose level for entinostat (5 mg) represents 50% of the recommended Phase II dose for this compound as a single agent.
This phase I/II trial studies the side effects of sitravatinib and how well it works with nivolumab in treating patients with kidney cancer that has spread to other places in the body. Sitravatinib may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Immunotherapy with monoclonal antibodies, such as nivolumab, may help the body's immune system attack the cancer, and may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Giving sitravatinib and nivolumab may work better in treating patients with kidney cancer.
The primary objective of the trial is to determine the effect of a 24-week concomitant coaching on patient reported outcomes of patients receiving standard treatment for mRCC with sunitinib or a combination of pembrolizumab + axitinib or avelumab + axitinib in first line therapy.
The primary objective of this study is to evaluate the incidence of high-grade (i.e. Grade 3-4 and Grade 5 of CTCAE v4.0) adverse reactions of interest in patients with metastatic RCC who have progressed during or after receiving at least one prior systemic anti-angiogenic treatment and who are eligible for nivolumab monotherapy.
This is a Phase 2, non-randomised, open-label, multicentric study to investigate the efficacy and safety of nivolumab monotherapy in 6 cohorts of patients with specific rare cancers who have unresectable locally advanced or metastatic disease, which is resistant or refractory to standard therapy, or for which standard therapy does not exist, or is not considered appropriate, and for which no other experimental treatment options are available.
The purpose of this study is to test the effectiveness and safety of various nivolumab combinations compared to nivolumab and ipilimumab in participants with advanced kidney cancer