View clinical trials related to Lymphoma.
Filter by:RATIONALE: Collecting information about the effect of hematologic cancer and its treatment on quality of life may help doctors learn more about the disease and plan the best treatment. PURPOSE: This phase I trial is studying quality of life in younger leukemia and lymphoma survivors.
This phase 1 study of CX-3543 is designed to test the safety, tolerability and highest safe dose level of this drug in patients with advanced solid tumor cancers.
RATIONALE: Visiting patients at home to teach them about self care after a stem cell transplant may be more effective than standard therapy in improving quality of life. PURPOSE: This clinical trial is studying home visits to see how well they work compared with standard therapy in treating patients undergoing donor stem cell transplant for hematologic cancer.
This is a single-arm, open-label study of Iodine 131 Anti B1 Antibody for the treatment of 1st or 2nd relapsed indolent B cell lymphomas or B cell lymphomas that have transformed to a more aggressive histology. The primary endpoint of the study is to determine the response rate. Secondary endpoints of the study is to determine the duration of response, time to progression, time-to-treatment failure, safety, and survival. Forty patients will receive therapy on this study at the 2 clinical sites. Patients will undergo 2 phases of the study. In the first phase, termed the "dosimetric dose", patients will receive an infusion of unlabeled Anti B1 Antibody (450 mg) over 70 minutes (including a 10 minute flush) immediately followed by a 30 minute infusion (including a 10 minute flush) of Anti B1 Antibody (35 mg) which has been trace-labeled with 5 mCi of Iodine 131. Whole body gamma camera scans will be obtained on 1) Day 0; 2) Day 2, 3, or 4; and 3) Day 6 or 7 following the dosimetric dose. Using the dosimetric data from the 3 imaging timepoints, a patient-specific dose of Iodine 131 Anti B1 Antibody to deliver the desired total body dose of radiotherapy will be calculated. In the second phase, termed the "radioimmunotherapeutic dose", patients will receive a 70 minute infusion (including a 10 minute flush) of unlabeled Anti B1 Antibody (450 mg) immediately followed by a 30 minute infusion (including a 10 minute flush) of 35 mg Anti B1 Antibody labeled with the patient-specific dose of Iodine 131 to deliver a whole body dose of 75 cGy to patients with no hematologic risk factors. Patients who have platelet counts of 100,001-149,999 cells/mm3 will receive 65 cGy and patients who are obese will be dosed based upon 137% of their lean body mass (see Appendix A). Patients will be treated with either saturated solution potassium iodide (SSKI), Lugol's solution, or potassium iodide tablets starting at least 24 hours prior to the first infusion of the Iodine 131 Anti B1 Antibody and continuing for 14 days following the last infusion of Iodine 131 Anti B1 Antibody (i.e., therapeutic dose).
The purpose of this study is to define if flow cytometry has more sensitivity for detecting neoplastic cells in cerebrospinal fluid versus conventional cytology.
This is a study for the outcome and safety of individualized busulfan dosing with cyclophosphamide and etoposide for patients preparing for a stem cell transplant to treat Non-Hodgkin or Hodgkin's Lymphoma.
This is a multicenter, open-label study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of treatment with brentuximab vedotin (SGN-35) in patients who have previously participated in an brentuximab vedotin study.
This is a phase I and pharmacology study of Camptothecin-20-O-Propionate Hydrate (CZ48) in Patients with Solid Tumors or Lymphoma. OBJECTIVES Primary: 1. To describe the dose limiting toxicities and adverse event profile of Camptothecin-20-O-Propionate hydrate (CZ48) administered orally every day. 2. To determine Phase II recommended dose of Camptothecin-20-O-Propionate hydrate (CZ48) administered orally every day. Secondary: 3. To perform a pharmacokinetic study of orally administered CZ48 in the plasma. 4. To assess responses by RECIST criteria. 5. To follow patients for survival.
Neurodevelopmental outcomes in children treated for cancer involving the central nervous system (CNS) provide educators with new challenges with regards to classification, monitoring, and intervention in the regular or special education classroom setting. Recommendations resulting from serial neurodevelopmental evaluations for these children often do not overlap with traditional special education recommendations commonly included in Individual Education Plans (IEPs) for children with congenital or genetic learning problems. The investigators currently do not know whether or not school-based treatment for learning problems, based on the child's IEP, incorporates recommendations made based on a neurodevelopmental evaluation appropriately. In addition, it is not clear whether or not the recommendations that are included in a child's IEP have any beneficial outcome on the child's learning and academic achievement over time. The purpose of this project is to examine the relationship between neurodevelopmental outcomes, recommendations for intervention, special education services and accommodations included in a child's school IEP, and outcome for the child following implementation of the IEP. The study has two major specific aims: 1. To quantify the clinical and educational contributions of recommendations resulting from neurodevelopmental evaluations and the subsequent development of IEPs. Hypothesis 1.1: Higher concordance between recommendations made based on neurodevelopmental evaluations and criteria written into children's IEPs will be associated with more positive academic outcomes (i.e. maintenance or improvement in academic skills). Hypothesis 1.2: Children who have higher concordance between criteria written into their IEPs and academic services actually received will show more positive academic outcomes than children whose IEP criteria and academic services are less concordant. 2. To evaluate an intervention that will improve academic outcomes for children treated for cancer. Hypothesis 2.1: Children whose IEPs are monitored more frequently will show more positive academic outcomes than their peers whose IEPs are monitored less frequently.
The purpose of this study is to determine if MDX-1203 is safe for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma or non-hodgkin's lymphoma.