View clinical trials related to Melanoma.
Filter by:Therapeutic agents used in malignant melanoma treatment such as BRAF/MEK inhibitors and anti-CTLA-4/Anti-PD-1 antibodies go along with harmful side effects in a considerable proportion of patients and treatment costs may cause relevant medical expenditures per month. Currently, therapy response assessment in melanoma patients is performed using RECIST criteria which are based on changes in tumour size. PET/CT combines morphological and metabolic information. Thus, the so-called PERCIST-criteria were introduced integrating change in size and glucose utilization for response assessment in solid tumors. Due to the different mechanism of action these new agents introduce different response patterns increase in tumor size due to inflammation for antibody therapies). In conventional chemotherapies, re-staging is usually performed 3 months after treatment initiation which is the result of empirical investigations. Moreover, it has recently been shown, that response to new targeted therapies can be detected much earlier using PET or functional MR techniques. This forms the rationale for the monitoring of melanoma patients using a combined PET/MR technique after only 2 weeks of therapy initiation. Especially for patients in stage IV with a medium survival time of 12 months, a 2.5 months earlier re-staging and therapy adjustment would have significant consequences for the individual clinical course.
It is not known whether radiological assessments during follow up after surgery for high risk melanoma improve survival. Since radiological examinations are resource demanding, could inflict worry and cause irradiation exposure it is an important question to address. With the introduction of effective medical treatments for malignant melanoma patients, there is a tendency to introduce radiological assessments despite the lack of evidence.
An immunotherapy study combining ipilimumab and evofosfamide for the treatment of patients with confirmed metastatic or locally advanced prostate cancer, metastatic pancreatic cancer, melanoma or human papillomavirus (HPV) negative squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck that have failed to respond to standard therapy, progressed despite standard therapy, for which standard therapy does not offer the potential for increased survival.
The incidence of Melanoma is rapidly growthing,and in China,dacarbazine combined with cisplatin is conmendly used as the first-line chemotherapy of metastatic melanoma. But the response rate and survival results are very limited.This trial aim to add a safe and effective anti-angiogenesis drug,Human-recombinant endostatin,to find out a new strategy which may further extend the PFS and OS with a tolerated toxicity.
Recombinant human GM-CSF herpes simplex virus injection (OrienX010) is a genetically engineered from Chinese patients oral separation of wild type 1 herpes simplex virus (HSV) as the carrier insert GM-CSF gene therapy drug.After gene recombination technology successively removing ICP34.5, ICP47 and insert the deactivation ICP6 gene, and at the site of the original ICP34.5 insert guided by IE promoter of hCMV human gm-csf gene.The drug after tumor site local injections of dosing, on the one hand, because of the soluble tumor characteristics of herpes simplex virus, reconstructing it after HSV-1 virus carrier at the injection site specific "soluble tumor" kill tumor cells;Viral vector expressed in tumor site, on the other hand, to produce high concentrations of GM-CSF enhance the antitumor immune function, play "beside the destruction effect", have inhibition effect on the distant metastases.
Combination therapy is becoming more and more general in the treatment of oncological diseases. In this clinical trial combination the standard immunotherapeutic treatment; the programmed death 1 (PD-1) regulatory antibody Nivolumab and a peptide vaccine consisting of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) and Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO) peptides will be tested in patients with metastatic melanoma. Patients will be treated with Nivolumab every second week as long as there is clinical benefit. The PD-L1/IDO peptide vaccine is given from start of Nivolumab and every second week for the first 6 vaccines and thereafter every fourth week up to 1 year.
Rationale: The combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab induces relatively high response rates and promising response depth in late stage melanoma. Nevertheless, it takes time till responses occur and still a significant number of patients do not benefit from treatment, due to rapid progressive disease or resistance to therapy. In contrast to immunotherapies targeted therapies (BRAF or MEK inhibitors), can induce faster and higher response rates, but often of shorter duration, even when combined. Initial attempts of combining vemurafenib or dabrafenib + trametinib with ipilimumab failed due to toxicity. Patients with elevated levels of serum LDH are less likely to respond to immunotherapy compared to patients with normal LDH levels. This does not mean that such patients do not benefit at all from immunotherapy. This raises the question, whether response rates upon immunotherapy can be improved by upfront reduction of tumor burden and normalization of LDH. The investigators postulate that induction therapy with combined BRAF+MEK inhibition, and subsequent LDH normalization, can improve response rates to the rates seen in LDH normal patients. To address this question the investigators have setup a randomized phase 2 trial in metastatic melanoma patients with elevated serum LDH comparing the response rates upon ipilimumab + nivolumab versus ipilimumab + nivolumab preceded by 6 weeks of vemurafenib + cobimetinib induction. Furthermore, less than half of the patients treated with the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab received maintenance nivolumab, and approximately 40% of all patients discontinued treatment for toxicity. In 70% of patients responses were ongoing despite discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity. This raises the question, to what extent does maintenance therapy add clinical benefit to an ongoing immune response. Preclinical data indicate even that continuous restimulation of T cells can result in activation induced non-responsiveness (anergy). Therefore, a secondary objective of this trial will be, to test a response-driven nivolumab scheme Objectives: Primary Objective • To compare efficacy of induction vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) versus upfront ipilimumab + nivolumab treatment (Arm B). Secondary Objectives - To describe duration of response and overall survival induced by vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) as compared to ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B) - To describe the rate and quality of toxicity observed in the two study arms - To describe the rate of ongoing responses upon response-driven flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance - To determine the immune-activating capacity of induction therapy with vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab. - To evaluate the changes in systemic immune competence Study design: This is a two-arm phase 2 study consisting of 200 BRAFV600E/K mutation-positive late-stage melanoma patients with an elevated baseline LDH level (> ULN, < 3xULN) randomized 1:1 (stratified according to LDH) to receive either vemurafenib + cobimetinib directly followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) or standard first line ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance in a response-driven manner. Study population: Stage IV, or unresectable stage III, BRAFV600E/K mutation positive melanoma patients, naïve for BRAF/MEK, PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 targeting therapy, 18 years and older. Intervention: Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either 6 weeks vemurafenib 960 mg bid + cobimetinib 60 mg QD 21-day on, 7-day off (21/7) schedule, directly followed by 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm A) or first line standard 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive nivolumab maintenance flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) in a response-driven manner according to their response at week 18. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary Endpoints • Compare the best overall response rate (BORR) according to RECIST 1.1 of both arms at week 18 from start of treatment. Secondary Endpoints - Progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST 1.1 - Overall survival (OS) - Percentage of grade 3/4 toxicities according to CTCv4.03 - Percentage of ongoing response, percentage of patients requiring re-induction, response percentage upon re-induction - Changes in tumor-specific T cell responses
Phase III, open-label, randomized, controlled multi-center study of the efficacy of L19IL2/L19TNF neoadjuvant intratumoral treatment in Stage III B/C melanoma patients.
Characterisation of effect of SIRT and DSM-TACE as local treatment options for liver metastases in patients with advanced uveal melanoma with respect to progression-free survival and exploratory comparison of secondary endpoints regarding application, activity, adverse effects and impact on quality of life in a randomized study design.
A postmarketing Cohort study of Melanoma patients treated with IMLYGIC (Talimogene Laherparepvec) in clinical Practice to Characterize the risk of herpetic infection with detection of Talimogene Laherparepvec DNA among patients, close contacts, and health care providers; and long term safety in treated patients for up to 5 years after the first IMLYGIC dose.