View clinical trials related to Lung Neoplasms.
Filter by:The objective of this study is to assess safety and efficacy of CAB-AXL-ADC in NSCLC
This phase IV study is hoping to determine if examining the microbiome in non-small cell lung cancer participants who will receive durvalumab can predict treatment toxicity.
In this pilot study, healthy volunteers and patients with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer will undergo [18F]F-AraG dynamic imaging on the uEXPLORER total body Positron Emission Tomography/Computerized Tomography scanner to obtain preliminary data regarding pharmacokinetics and early biodistribution images.
The purpose of the study is to learn whether the study treatment (capmatinib), which already shows efficacy and safety in non-Chinese patients, could help Chinese patients with controlling their lung cancer in a safe way. Participants will have a type of lung cancer called non-small cell lung lancer (NSCLC), with a specific alteration in a part of their DNA (called mutation) of the MET gene, within a specific part of this gene called exon 14. Participants who have advanced (or metastatic) non-small cell lung cancer with specific mutations in the MET gene but without mutations in the EGFR or ALK genes, who are aged 18 years or older will be enrolled in this study. The study drug, capmatinib (also known as INC280), is an oral drug that is called a 'targeted' medicine, which means it targets particular processes that may not be working properly in cancer cells (called dysregulation). The dysregulation of the MET signaling in cancer cells of patients with NSCLC is believed to make the cancer worse. Capmatinib has been shown to selectively block the effects of the MET gene and therefore may help in keeping the disease under control, stopping cancer cells from growing.
The purpose of the study is to assess whether lung ultrasound is able to detect lung injury after lung resection surgery.
Mediastinal lymph node (LN) involvement (N2) in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) concerns 15% of resectable tumors and is associated with a poor prognosis and an overall survival reaching 9 to 49%. Literature fails to provide any definitive consensus regarding the management of these patients, except for the platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. The N2 involvement remains a matter of debate because of its not yet well-classified heterogeneity. Regarding anatomy, the Mountain and Dresler's regional LN classification for lung cancer staging remains the reference. Different studies classified IIIA-N2 disease into 4 groups, in addition to the skip-N2 phenomenon: minimal-N2, N2 single station, N2 multiple stations, and bulky-N2. Other subgroups were recently proposed for the 8th edition of the TNM: N2a1 - single station skip, N2a2 - single station non-skip, N2b - multiple stations. The French National Cancer Institute (INCa) proposed guidelines, but in case of cN2 staging without mediastinal infiltration, guidelines remained imprecise ("resectability should be discussed for each case") and suggested surgery first, or induction chemotherapy, or concomitant chemoradiation. Thus, optimal management of cIIIA-N2 remains controversial but complete tumor resection can be related to long-term survival in some patients, including 10 years after surgery [1]. In this situation, the identification of markers that will help select IIIA-N2 patients who will benefit from surgical resection is mandatory.
Study aims to determine if functional lung avoidance based on perfusion single photon emission (SPECT)/CT scan, improves toxicity outcomes for patients with advanced lung cancer undergoing chemo-radiotherapy. Functional avoidance implies a dose plan that takes functional distribution in the lung into account, and avoids highly functional lung volumes sparing them from radiation.
Narrow-Band Imaging (NBI) is useful to better demarcate the superficial extent of central type of lung cancer, but its sensitivity and specificity in clinical practice were little studied. This study aimed to investigate the diagnostic effects of NBI in suspected patients with central lung cancer and its application in staging diagnosis of central lung cancer.
This study includes a Dose Escalation Part to identify the recommended combination dose (RCD) and a Dose Expansion Part to further evaluate efficacy and safety. The primary objectives: Dose Escalation: To assess the safety and tolerability of HER3-DXd (patritumab deruxtecan; U3-1402) and osimertinib in subjects with locally advanced or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation with tumor progression after treatment with osimertinib, and to determine the recommended combination dose (RCD). Second-Line Dose Expansion Arm 1 and Arm 1b: To assess the preliminary antitumor activity of HER3-DXd and osimertinib in subjects with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with an EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation with tumor progression after treatment with osimertinib. Note: One or both of the study arms may open with one or two distinct dosing schedules. Second-Line Dose Expansion Arm 2: To assess the preliminary antitumor activity of HER3-DXd monotherapy in subjects with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with an EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation with tumor progression after treatment with osimertinib. First-Line Dose Expansion Cohorts 3, 4a, and 4b: To assess the preliminary antitumor activity of HER3-DXd and osimertinib in subjects with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with an EGFR exon 19 deletion or L858R mutation without prior systemic treatment for locally advanced or metastatic disease.
The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of pembrolizumab (MK-3475) combined with lenvatinib (MK-7902/E7080) compared to pembrolizumab alone (with placebo for lenvatinib) in treatment-naïve adults with no prior systemic therapy for their metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose tumors have a programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) Tumor Proportion Score (TPS) greater than or equal to 1%. The primary study hypotheses are that: 1) the combination of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib is superior to pembrolizumab alone as assessed by Progression-free Survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (RECIST 1.1); and 2) the combination of pembrolizumab and lenvatinib is superior to pembrolizumab alone as assessed by Overall Survival (OS).