View clinical trials related to Carcinoma.
Filter by:Randomized Controlled Trial to Prevent Peritoneal Seeding in Gastric Cancer
This randomized phase II trial is studying how well selenomethionine (SLM) works in reducing mucositis in patients with locally advanced head and neck cancer who are receiving cisplatin and radiation therapy. SLM may help prevent or reduce mucositis, or mouth sores, in patients receiving chemotherapy and radiation therapy. It is not yet known whether SLM is more effective than a placebo in reducing mucositis
This is a phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation clinical trial to evaluate the safety of SGN-75 in combination with everolimus in patients with CD70-positive metastatic renal cell carcinoma.
The hope to treat more patients with hepatocellular carcinoma successfully is however tempered by the shortage of donors leading to an increasing waiting time for liver transplantation (LT). Intention-to-treat analysis have showed that the reported excellent long-term outcome is curtailed and significantly hampered by the growing incidence of patients who must be removed from the waiting list because of tumor progression. A way to face with this issue is to treat hepatocellular carcinoma prior to LT. Among therapeutic options to impede tumor progression, Transarterial Chemoembolization (TACE) is the most common modality used. While there are many studies concerning TACE in this setting, none are controlled studies and thus there is no firm evidence concerning its efficacy in reducing drop-out or increasing survival. Moreover TACE may induce risks (liver failure, arterial complications…) while waiting for LT. Most of the available data have been based upon analysis of patients who received a transplant and have not included patients who were eligible for LT but died, or showed progression, before it could be performed. Therefore, studies conducted on an intention-to-treat basis are needed to clarify the benefit and the risks of TACE prior to LT in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma.
Randomized, double-blind, 2-arm crossover study comparing tivozanib hydrochloride and sunitinib in subjects with metastatic RCC who have received no prior systemic therapy for Renal Cell Carcinoma (RCC).
The purpose of this study is to see how well the study drug, axitinib, helps control renal (kidney) cancer that has come back (recurrent) or spread (metastatic). Patients must have already been treated as a participant in a clinical trial with sunitinib, sorafenib, pazopanib or placebo (sugar pill) after their initial surgery. This study will examine the effect of adjuvant tyrosine kinase inhibition (TKI) therapy (sorafenib, sunitinib or pazopanib) on subsequent exposure to TKI with axitinib in the first-line recurrent or metastatic setting.
This multi-center, prospective, observational cohort study will evaluate the effectiveness, safety and utilization of treatments in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma and basal cell carcinoma nevus syndrome. The total study duration is anticipated to be a maximum of 8 years, including 3 years for patient recruitment and 5 years follow-up.
This was a multi-center, open-label, Phase Ib dose escalation /Phase II study in recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (RM HNSCC) patients considered to be resistant, ineligible or intolerant to platinum-based chemotherapy. The Phase Ib included three arms. Three different methods of administration and two different BYL719 formulations were studied to determine the MTD and/or RP2D of BYL719 in combination with cetuximab: Arm A - film-coated whole tablets were orally administered to patients who were able to swallow the tablets; Arm B - a drinkable suspension prepared from crushed film-coated tablets was administered orally to patients with swallowing dysfunction Arm C - a suspension from a dispersible tablet administered via G-tube, in patients with swallowing dysfunction. Arm C was used to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK), compared to Arm A (film coated tablet), and safety of the dispersible tablet of the dispersible tablet formulation of BYL719. The Phase II investigated the clinical efficacy of BYL719 and consisted of an open label, randomized Phase II part investigating BYL719 in combination with cetuximab compared to cetuximab alone in patients resistant or intolerant to platinum and naïve to cetuximab (Scheme 1: Arm 1 and Arm 2), and a non-randomized Phase II part Scheme 2: Arm 3. In addition, patients who experienced disease progression in Arm 2 (cetuximab) were allowed to switch to the combination regimen (cross-over, Arm 2B). The safety of the BYL719 in combination with cetuximab was also further characterized in Arms 1, 2B and 3. Patients were treated until progression of disease), unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of informed consent, whichever occurred first (except for phase II Arm 2 had the opportunity to crossover to the combination treatment (Arm 2B). In the follow-up period all patients had to complete the safety follow-up assessments within 30 days after the last dose of the study treatment. Patients who did not have disease progression at the time of discontinuation of study treatment were radiologically followed for disease status until disease progression, initiation of subsequent anticancer therapies, or death, whichever occurred first. In addition, all patients enrolled in Phase II were followed for survival.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of surgical resection compared with best supportive care in patients with resectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with portal venous thrombus (PVTT) in the first branch of portal vein.
The investigators hypothesize everolimus toxicities are linked to pharmacokinetic variabilities of everolimus. Thus, early detection of clinical or biological risk factors will lead to personalized dosage treatment and permit a better tolerance without altering efficacy.