View clinical trials related to Lung Neoplasms.
Filter by:This is a phase III, randomized, double-blinded, multicenter clinical study to evaluate the efficiency and safety of AK105 (Anti-PD1 antibody) plus paclitaxel and carboplatin vs placebo plus paclitaxel and carboplatin as First-line Therapy in patients with metastatic squamous non-small cell lung cancer.
This is a phase III , randomized, double-blinded, multicenter clinical study to compare efficacy and safety of AK105 (Anti-PD1 antibody) combined with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed vs Placebo combined with Carboplatin and Pemetrexed as first-line therapy in patients with EGFR and ALK wild type metastatic nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer.
Osimertinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) that is selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. The AURA 3 study (T790M-positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer in progression after first-line EGFR-TKI therapy, shown that the median duration of progression-free survival was significantly longer with osimertinib than with platinum therapy plus pemetrexed (10.1 months vs. 4.4 months p<0.001). In addition, clinical data show that patients with mutated EGFR NSCLC receiving osimertinib in first line, presented an objective response rate of 77 % with a disease control rate of 98 % and a median PFS was 19.3 months. Finally, The FLAURA study randomized phase 3 study clearly demonstrated the superiority of osimertinib compared with erlotinib or gefitinib in EGFR mutated nonpretreated NSCLC (median PFS of 18.9 months versus 10.2 months). However, several issues remain unknown or debated : - What are the mechanisms of resistance to osimertinib prescribed in first-line? - What are the consequences of prolonged exposure to osimertinib on the expression of markers of response to immunotherapy? - Is there an association between kinetic parameters of ctDNA (circulating tumor DNA) and prediction of response to osimertinib and/ or and prediction of therapeutic escape under osimertinib? In order to respond to all these questions, this phase II trial will be the first to systemically analyze the mechanisms of resistance to Osimertinib based on the analysis of biopsy, and collection of plasma from all patients during the course of treatment.
Experience drawn from many scientific articles showed that many patients who develop a limited pattern of pulmonary metastases after treatment of a primary tumor may benefit from surgical resection of the lung deposits. Pulmonary metastasectomy with curative intent is widely performed with the aim of prolonging life and, in some cases, being curative. Usually the surgical strategy is defined based on analysis of radiological investigations, performed during a follow-up program after resection of a tumor. However, many studies showed that the actual sensitivity of this examinations, namely computed tomography (CT) and positron-emission tomography (PET) is far from being 100% and finding further unexpected nodules at operation with lung manual palpation is not uncommon. Many surgeons perform pulmonary metastasectomy with a minimally invasive approach, in view of a less morbid and more cosmetic approach, but lung palpation is considerably hampered and surgical radicality might be impaired. With this study the investigators want to assess the ability of lung ultrasonography performed via a key-hole access (thoracoscopy, VATS) in detecting lung nodules compared with the standard practice represented by open thoracotomy, that is a wider incision that allows manual exploration of the organ. Therefore, every patient enrolled will undergo a double phase surgical approach: a first phase by thoracoscopy where a thorough lung ultrasonography will be performed and number and position of lung nodules will be annotated, and a second phase by open thoracotomy where lung is palpated and suspicious nodules will be removed. The incisions used for the first phase will be extended for the second, rendering any other procedure for the execution of lung ultrasonography unnecessary. Should this study demonstrate a non-inferiority of lung ultrasonography in detecting lung nodules compared with manual palpation of the lung, patients should be offered a less invasive approach for treatment of their condition with no concerns regarding a potential lower therapeutic effect.
This prospective, single-center, randomized, controlled study will evaluate the efficacy and safety of sintilimab or placebo in combination with chemotherapy as second-line treatment for patients with stage IV nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer with wild-type EGFR after failure with platinum-containing chemotherapy. Treatment may continue as long as participants are experiencing clinical benefit as assessed by the investigator, i.e., in the absence of unacceptable toxicity or symptomatic deterioration attributed to disease progression.
The study will develop and test the feasibility of the Lung Cancer Assessment of Risk and Education (LungCARE) intervention to increase discussions about lung cancer screening between patients and physicians. This intervention will be designed to reach primary care patients and will be implemented at three levels of the healthcare structure: patient, physician, and system. The patient component includes a short lung cancer screening video and questions regarding screening preferences. Patients will receive immediate feedback in a report (patient report) that summarizes their lung cancer screening preferences and a handout summarizing the educational video. At the physician level, primary care physicians (PCPs) will receive a similar report (physician report), which will be delivered to them prior to the patient visit. The report contains additional information about documenting discussion related to risk, screening, and referrals in the electronic health record (EHR) system (system component). The investigators will develop the LungCARE intervention and have a comparison group that will receive usual care. Preliminary testing of LungCARE will occur via a randomized controlled trial (RCT) at the University of California, San Francisco, General Internal Medicine and Women's Health Primary Care clinics. The RCT will evaluate LungCARE among 50 PCPs and 120 high-risk current and former smoker patients. The investigators will determine whether the intervention is accepted by patients and physicians and whether patients who received LungCARE are more likely to discuss lung cancer screening with their physicians when compared to patients and physicians in the comparison group. The investigators will also determine whether the intervention affects knowledge of lung cancer and low-dose computed tomography (LDCT) screening, perception of risk, and worry about lung cancer in patients when compared to patients in the comparison group. The investigators expect their research to provide specific recommendations that will facilitate patient-physician discussions about LDCT screening and promote shared decision-making among patients and physicians.
This is a double blind randomized controlled study investigating the efficacy of a single dose of 150 mg risedronate (a bone anti-resorptive) vs a single dose of placebo given prior to SBRT for peripheral lung tumors that are within 2 cm of the chest wall. Our hypothesis is that the use of a single dose of 150 mg risedronate will eliminate or greatly reduce the rapid bone loss that occurs with radiation induced early osteoclast recruitment/activation. Patients will be given either a single dose of 150 mg risedronate or placebo at the time of their treatment mapping "simulation" CT scan. Typically, radiation treatments begin at 1 - 3 weeks following this mapping scan, as each treatment plan requires detailed physics calculations and quality assurance checks. All CT imaging referenced below is performed as a routine standard of care surveillance and is necessary for cancer treatment follow-up. These chest CT scans that are utilized in this research protocol would be performed every 3 months regardless of inclusion on this trial.
For patients diagnosed with early stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) on preoperative computerized tomography (CT) and positron emission tomography (PET) scans, surgical resection is usually the preferred method of treatment. However, to be eligible for surgery, current guidelines require that the cancer has not spread to the lymph nodes in the chest cavity. To evaluate these lymph nodes, the standard of care is to undergo an endobronchial ultrasound (EBUS) procedure, where all the visible lymph nodes in the chest are biopsied (sampled) with a needle. Unfortunately, these biopsies are often inconclusive, especially in patients who have no evidence of mediastinal lymph node spread on pre-operative imaging. Currently, the standard of care mandates that inconclusive biopsies should be repeated, either through another EBUS, or through more invasive procedures. Repeat inconclusive biopsies are oftentimes inconclusive as well; leading to a vicious cycle of inconclusive results, a delay in treatment, morbidity for the patient, and increased costs to the healthcare system. To circumvent this issue, the investigators have developed, validated and published a 4-point score, the Canada Lymph Node Score (CLNS), which uses four features observed during EBUS to predict whether the cancer has spread to the lymph nodes or not. Research has demonstrated that lymph nodes which appear benign on both CT and PET scan that also have a CLNS of ≤1/4 are almost certainly benign. As such, it is believed that these "triple normal" lymph do not require biopsy (or repeat biopsy). The investigators are challenging the current standard of care in lung cancer, which mandates that all the lymph nodes in the chest need to be biopsied (i.e. Systematic Sampling) before surgery, by proposing that triple normal lymph nodes can be omitted, and only those with cancer potential should be biopsied (i.e. Targeted Sampling).To prove this hypothesis, a randomized controlled trial comparing Systematic Sampling to Targeted Sampling is required. A feasibility trial is proposed to determine whether this large-scale randomized trial will be possible.
The main objective of this study is to evaluate if systemic exposure of osimertinib (i.e. AUC) is increased when osimertinib is co-administered with cobicistat in patients with relatively low plasma trough concentration while receiving the standard osimertinib dose.
To compare efficacy and safety of Abivertinib maleate alone versus standard first-line EGFR-TKIs for the treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer with sensitive EGFR mutation