View clinical trials related to Neoplasm Metastasis.
Filter by:This is a Phase 1/1b, multicenter, open label study to evaluate the Safety and Antitumor Activity of FS120, an OX40/CD137 Bispecific Antibody, Alone and in Combination with Pembrolizumab, in Subjects with Advanced Malignancies
Almonertinib is a three-generation epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor(EGFR-TKI), which has shown competitive potential in the second-line treatment against first-generation TKIs. This study intends to assess the efficacy and safety of stereotactic radiosurgery with sequential almonertinib in treatment-naive EGFR-mutant NSCLC patients with brain metastases.
The study will evaluate the preliminary efficacy of 3 combinations (Sym021+Sym022, Sym021+Sym023 and Sym021+Sym023+irinotecan) in patients with biliary tract carcinomas (BTC) and with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) by assessing overall response rates (ORRs) per Investigator assessment using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1 The study will also evaluate the safety and tolerability profile of the 3 combinations
Title of the study A study to examine the value of broad agnostic NGS panel testing versus reimbursed organ-directed NGS: a Belgian Precision study of the BSMO in collaboration with the Cancer Centre Study Number BSMO 2020-1 Study Phase Exploratory Sponsor Belgian Society of medical Oncology (BSMO) Treatment None Background and Rationale Several drugs targeting mutated gene products in cancer cells are available to Belgian patients through reimbursement of the drugs and, soon, by reimbursed organ-specific genomic testing. This context is unfavorable with regard to the following issues: 1. Many more additional drugs with sound scientific rationale and preclinical evidence are available through clinical trials. The relevant genes are generally not included in the reimbursed NGS and ad hoc identification of such patients is extremely difficult and thus severely hampering the accrual in such trials. This denies patients a potential access to innovative treatments from which they could benefit and hampers progress. 2. The same genes can be mutated in other cancer types, other than the reimbursed context, but are not detected due to the organ-specific approach in reimbursed NGS. Examination of these genes with an agnostic approach would give these other patients potential access to the drugs (via various routes, including clinical trials or medical need or otherwise) 3. The broader panels applied by some Belgian platforms (50-100 genes), sometimes in an agnostic approach, do not cover all potentially actionable genes or not all types of actionable variants in these genes. 4. Rearrangements which are highly actionable are not systematically covered in NGS testing, but rely on immunohistochemistry (if done at all) of fusion panels testing that requires additional funding. 5. The various Belgian NGS labs use accredited but heterogeneous methodology and it has been reported that the detection rate of some mutations varies from one site to another. Therefore, from a patient and oncologist point of view there are current deficiencies that jeopardize optimal access of patients to current or novel genome-driven therapies. Defective identification of sensitive patients limits the implementation of clinical trials and their accrual rates and therefore the attractiveness of Belgium for such trials. There are more comprehensive commercial platforms that cover a large set of actionable genes (up to hundreds of genes) and the various types of mutations in these genes: sequence mutations, rearrangements, resulting in fusion genes, and gene amplifications. These commercial vendors have adequate comprehensive methodology but are too expensive (at their current public pricing) for general application. One of these is the platform of Foundation Medicine that builds on a large experience in variant annotation in the US and includes probably all current actionable targets including gene mutations, fusions, MSI, and TMB, all at once in one result. They also report actionability and established or clinical trial treatment options. To oncologists this is very attractive compared to the fragmented, sequential and very limited current reimbursed conditions. The investigators estimate that up to 20% of advanced cancer patients could get access to genotype-based treatment that are not covered by the organ-based reimbursement based access to NGS. This can be in the form of off-label application of reimbursed drugs, pharma-sponsored drug development trials that address a specific genotype or pharma sponsored or academic basket trials. Without broad agnostic testing the identification of eligible patients remains extremely difficult. A recent study [A study of genetic characteristics and suitability for targeted cancer treatment (TARGET)] showed that the rate of detection of actionable mutations increased from 28% with local testing to 66% with Foundation Medicine testing. Objectives 1. To determine the added value of comprehensive and agnostic NGS versus "real-world" practice ("real-world" practice means local testing, no reimbursement for local testing and/or no accessible metastatic lesion) in providing patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors access molecular guided therapy and/or immunotherapy based on genomic results. 2. To describe the landscape of genomic alterations detected by reimbursed NGS 3. To describe he landscape of genomic alterations detected by comprehensive panel testing 4. To assess the technical success of comprehensive panel testing 5. To describe the uptake of treatments recommended by the molecular tumor board guided by the genomic testing.
Mid to low-lying rectal cancer patient with enlarged lateral lymph node befor treatment and receiving lateral lymph node dissection would be enrolled. Radiomics parameters of lateral lymph nodes would be extracted by expert software. Then a part of the nodes would be used as the training set to build the prediction model, and the another part nodes would be used as the validation set.
The aim of this research study is to assess the effectiveness of combined ablation and cementoplasty in the treatment of spinal, pelvic, and extraspinal lesions causing pain resistant to conventional treatment at our centre. In particular, the investigator seek to verify the safety and efficacy for multiple primary tumor types and benign lesions as well as encompass multiple measurements of outcome, including visual analog scale (VAS) for pain, opioid and analgesic use, and overall performance scales, combined with cross-sectional imaging follow-up to assess tumor burden, to ascertain a comprehensive Canadian single-centre experience that has been lacking in previous studies.
This prospective single arm double-blind study approved by the Ethics Committee of the institution, will be conducted on at the Oncology Institute of Vojvodina in Sremska Kamenica, Serbia. Patients with colo-rectal cancer liver metastases (CRLM) is presented to the multi-disciplinary team (MDT).Screening and enrolment is conducted after established of indication for resection. The surgeons assesses resection margin (RM) for every resected liver specimen (RLS) intra-operatively by inspection and palpation. These data will be compared with pathological RM examination as a "gold standard". Resection margin of 1 mm or more will be rated as negative RM (RM-) otherwise RM is positive (RM+). Taking the result of the pathohistological examination as "gold standard" it is determined that RM is true positive when the pathologist and surgeon agreed that the RM is positive. False negative RM is when the surgeon assesses RM as negative and pathologist as positive. The sensitivity of the surgical assessment of RM+ is defined as the rate of RM+ which was correctly identified. True negative RM is determined when the pathologist and surgeon agreed that it is negative RM. False positive RM defined when the surgeon assessed RM as positive, but pathologist found that it was RM-. The specificity of the surgical assessment of RM is defined as the rate of RM- which is correctly identified. Total accuracy represents the rate of correctly recognized positive and negative RM, relative to the total number of samples. Agreement between surgeon and pathologists finding will be analyzed as well as difference between them. Disease recurrence and disease-free survival (DFS) will be analyzed by RM.
This is a single arm phase II study of brigatinib alone for patients with brain metastases from anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), who have either not been treated previously with a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) targeting ALK or who have had prior exposure to crizotinib.
This is a randomized, open-label, dose-finding, multi-centre, phase Ⅰb study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of JMT103 in patients with bone metastases from solid tumors.
After stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) of brain metastases, patients undergo a standard brain magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to assess treatment response 12 weeks after completion of treatment. The interpretation of this standard MRI can sometimes be challenging as it can be difficult to differentiate tumour getting bigger/returning (progression/recurrence) from expected radiotherapy treatment-related changes known as radionecrosis. This study is a pilot brain imaging study that is investigating if readily available forms of imaging such as contrast-clearance analysis MRI (also known as TRAMs) and/or 18 Fluoromethyl-choline positron emission tomography/computerised tomography (18F-choline PET/CT) are equivalent to multi-parametric MRI in their ability to differentiate tumour from radionecrosis. Multi-parametric MRI has the most evidence for its ability to discriminate tumour from radionecrosis but is resource intensive and not routinely available in most centres.