View clinical trials related to Mouth Neoplasms.
Filter by:This randomized phase III trial studies chemotherapy to see how well it works with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma that has come back (recurrent) or that has spread to other parts of the body (metastatic). Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as docetaxel, cisplatin, carboplatin, and fluorouracil, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. Monoclonal antibodies, such as bevacizumab, may interfere with the ability of tumor cells to grow and spread. Bevacizumab may also make tumor cells more sensitive to chemotherapy and stop the growth of head and neck cancer by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether combination chemotherapy is more effective when given with or without bevacizumab in treating patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma.
This clinical trial studies widefield fluorescence and reflectance imaging, fluorescence spectroscopy, and tissue samples in regularly examining (monitoring) participants at risk for developing oral cancer. All tissue and cells are made of tiny particles. Some of these particles give off small amounts of light. This light is called fluorescence. Fluorescent imaging use instruments that shine different wavelengths (colors) of light in the mouth taking fluorescence pictures through a portable head light or by taking fluorescent and reflectance pictures through a dental microscope using a digital camera. Fluorescent spectroscopy uses a small probe placed gently against the lining of the mouth and the tissue is exposed to small amounts of fluorescent light that is then collected with a special camera and a computer to be analyzed. Checking mouth tissue samples under a microscope may also help detect abnormal cells. Diagnostic procedures, such as fluorescence and reflectance imaging, fluorescence spectroscopy imaging, and tissue samples, may help doctors detect pre-cancer or early cancer when it may be easier to treat.
The purpose is to determine the extent of genetic damage in oral mucosal lesions ascertained in the study, whether specific genotypes are associated with genetic damage observed in the oral mucosal lesions, whether the extent of genetic damage changes over time, and what factors (e.g. smoking) contribute to those changes. Genetic damage indicators will include among others DNA adduct formation, particularly related to tobacco smoke carcinogens such as polycyclic aromatic hydocarbons. The genotypes of interest will be focused on these affecting carcinogen metabolism, (e.g., (CYP family), but may also include those related to growth factors, cell cycle control, and DNA repair. Microsatellite instability is another key indicator of damage that we plan to examine. This study was undertaken due to the paucity of data on the types of oral lesions seen in general dental practice and the limited knowledge of the natural history of these lesions. Persons were enrolled who had red and/or white oral lesions identified at 6 Dental Clinics at VA Medical Centers. The VA Centers involved were: Washington, DC; Atlanta, GA; Durham, NC; San Francisco, CA; Danville, IL; and San Antonio, TX. When a dentist found a red or white lesions in the course of routine outpatient examinations and care, obvious causes such as denture frictional lesions could be ruled out, and the normal standard of care for the lesion was biopsy, the patient was considered for enrollment into the study. The study was described to the patient, the consent for was signed, the patient received an intraoral examination to identify and characterize the oral lesions, the lesions were photographed, an oral epithelial cell sample was taken from the site and from the rest of the oral mucosa, and the patient was interviewed using a standard questionnaire that requested information about sociodemograhic, medical, and lifestyle factors, particularly tobacco and alcohol use all as part of the study protocol, and the patient received a biopsy as part of normal care. The biopsy report was obtained as was a small piece of the biopsy material that was not needed for patient diagnostic purposes. The subjects returned every 4-6 months for reassessment of the lesion or to determine that the lesion had not returned. The patients completed a questionnaire at each of these visits so that lifestyle factors such as tobacco and alcohol use could be reassessed. Also oral epithelial cell scrapings were obtained at each of these visits. This study is particularly valuable because longitudinal data was collected and because the data were collected over time using standard procedures. ...
Cervical nodal metastasis is the single most important prognostic factor in head and neck cancers. Appropriate management of the neck is therefore of paramount importance in the treatment of these cancers. While it is obvious that the positive neck must be treated, controversy has always surrounded the clinically node negative neck with respect to the ideal treatment policy.The situation is difficult with regards to early cancers of the oral cavity (T1/T2). These cancers are usually treated with surgery where excision is through the per-oral route. Elective neck dissection in such a situation is an additional surgical procedure with its associated costs, prolonged hospitalization and may be unnecessary in as high as 80% of patients who finally turn out to be pathologically node negative. Should the neck be electively treated or there be a wait and watch policy? Current practice is that the neck is always addressed whenever there is an increased propensity to cervical metastasis or when patient follow-up is unreliable. There is clearly a need therefore for a large randomized trial that will resolve the issue either way once and for all. Primary Objective: To demonstrate whether elective neck dissection (END) is equal or superior to the wait and watch policy i.e. therapeutic neck dissection (TND) in the management of the clinically No neck in early T1 /T2 cancers of the oral cavity. Secondary Objective: 1. Does Ultrasound examination have any role in the routine initial workup of a node negative patient? 2. How are patients ideally followed up -does sonography have a role or is clinical examination sufficient. 3. Is assessment of tumor thickness by the surgeon at the time of initial surgery accurate -Is there a correlation 4. Identify histological prognostic factors in the primary that may help identify a sub-set of patients at an increased risk for cervical metastasis.