View clinical trials related to Neoplasms.
Filter by:This study will adapt and test a touch-screen computer program to evaluate cancer risk and provide patient-tailored recommendations for appropriate risk-based testing. This individually tailored intervention delivered right at the point of primary care and just prior to the office visit, can be a helpful and non-obstructive adjunct to clinical care. The primary aim of this project is to test whether a tailored intervention promoting risk-appropriate cancer testing results increases participation compared with a simple non-tailored reminder or no reminder. The trial is designed to determine the extent to which the Cancer Risk Intake System (CRIS) facilitates (1) participation in risk-appropriate colorectal cancer testing, as documented by electronic medical record audit; (2) patient receipt of risk-appropriate colorectal cancer testing recommendations from their physicians, as documented by electronic medical record audit; and (3) changes in patients' intent to participate in risk-appropriate colorectal cancer testing, as documented by patient report. The Family and Community Medicine and General Internal Medicine clinic databases will be used to identify potentially eligible patients with upcoming scheduled appointments. Because physicians will be the unit of random assignment, patients will be coded before study invitation as potential participants in the intervention or the comparison group. A random sample of eligible intervention and comparison group patients will be selected for contact. Identified patients will be mailed letters from the practices and signed by their physicians requesting their participation. The letters will describe a "study of beliefs and practices about cancer prevention and early detection" and will provide a toll-free number to refuse contact. One week after the mailing, patients who have not called to refuse contact will be called by study staff to explain the study, verify eligibility and, if the patient agrees, to arrange an in-person meeting at the clinic 30 minutes prior to their appointment. These calls will be made by trained research assistants who will follow standard calling protocols. After consent, participants will complete the computerized data collection (CRIS) immediately prior to a scheduled primary-care appointment. Intervention group patients and their physicians will receive a printout recommending risk-appropriate colorectal testing and ways to overcome perceived barriers to testing. A member of the research team will hand the patient his or her printout and will deliver the other printout to the physician. Comparison group patients and physicians will receive non-tailored printouts that are simple reminders about testing. The investigators will also establish a true no-contact control by conducting a retrospective chart review for randomly selected patients who did not receive an invitation to participate in the study. This no-contact control will establish a baseline screening rate. The investigators will then conduct analysis with the comparison and intervention group to see if individuals who participate in CRIS have a higher screening rate for colorectal cancer compared to the non-contact group. These additional data will help us better assess study Aims 1 and 2.
This study will create a patient data registry to collect and analyze information on technology usage and outcomes among patients receiving a broad range of relatively new radiation treatments that have become standards of care in our practice. Review of this information will serve as a basis for development of better patient management plans, to inform decisions about acquisition of new technologies, to provide information about quality in our care delivery, and to create a database that will securely warehouse ongoing information about what treatments the patients we serve need most and the challenges they face in the treatment process. The information gathered is likely to not only improve our services at the University of Maryland and its community sites but to advance medical science and enhance the quality of care for cancer patients.
Determine the safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of oral BAY1217389 given in combination with intravenous (IV) paclitaxel using an intermittent dosing schedule (2 days on / 5 days off) in subjects with advanced malignancies.
The cell behavior that the investigators regard as "malignant," including: cell autonomy; invasion and digestion of surrounding normal tissues; migration and colonization of distant organs; ability to develop resistance to drugs, temperature, or radiation; and ability to kill the host, are not only characteristics of cancer cells, but of pathogenic and/or opportunistic unicellular organisms (bacteria, fungi and protozoa). Rudolf Virchow (1821-1902), the father of modern pathology, first pointed out the resemblance between the biological behavior of cancer cells and that of single-celled organisms when causing infections. He thought, incorrectly, that cancer cells were cells infected with bacteria and had acquired their pathogenic behavior from them. Others later postulated that the behavior of cancer cells was likely due to the re-expression of past traits and behaviors (atavism) derived from their past evolutionary experience as independent, single-celled organisms from which all cells in multicellular organisms originated. In other words, the behavior of pathogenic unicellular organisms, including: unlimited replicative potential; capacity for invasion, migration, and metastases; abilities to evade the host's immune system, to generate multi-drug resistance; and to kill a host, are what the investigators define as "cancer" when one of the investigators cells re-express these past ancestral traits. This reversion or de-evolution of a differentiated cell to its ancestral undifferentiated, unicellular form has been named "Atavistic Metamorphosis." This does not imply that cancer cells are bacteria, protozoa, or yeasts. It means that cancer cells express functions and/or behaviors similar to their ancestral parents, the unicellular organisms from which our cells originated. If this is true, a combination of drugs that are effective to eradicate certain unicellular organisms may work in cancer treatment. The principal objective of this study is to determine whether there is a benefit for patients with advanced, metastatic and terminal cancers to be treated with combinations of selected drugs conventionally used in medical practice to kill bacterial, fungal and protozoal cells.
This randomized phase II/III trial studies how well standard of care therapy with stereotactic radiosurgery and/or surgery works and compares it to standard of care therapy alone in treating patients with breast cancer that has spread to one or two locations in the body (limited metastatic) that are previously untreated. Standard of care therapy comprising chemotherapy, hormonal therapy, biological therapy, and others may help stop the spread of tumor cells. Radiation therapy and/or surgery is usually only given with standard of care therapy to relieve pain; however, in patients with limited metastatic breast cancer, stereotactic radiosurgery, also known as stereotactic body radiation therapy, may be able to send x-rays directly to the tumor and cause less damage to normal tissue and surgery may be able to effectively remove the metastatic tumor cells. It is not yet known whether standard of care therapy is more effective with stereotactic radiosurgery and/or surgery in treating limited metastatic breast cancer.
The present study is a multicentric randomized phase III trial designed to assess whether overall survival and quality of life are improved in patients with asymptomatic colon cancer and unresectable SLM treated with resection of the PT followed by chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone.
Background: - Few studies or literature are available about the long-term safety of repeated peptide vaccinations in people over a period of time. Long-term vaccination may be needed to control tumors. Researchers gave a group of men a series of vaccine injections over 2 years. Now they want to give those same men the new version of the vaccine. They want to see if it produces different types of immune responses and also ensure that repeated vaccinations are safe. Objectives: - To find out the long-term safety of repeated T-cell receptor alternate reading frame protein (TARP) peptide vaccinations. Eligibility: - Men who took part in National Cancer Institute (NCI) protocol 09-C-0139. Design: - Participants will be screened with blood tests, scans, physical exam, medical history, and an evaluation of how well they perform everyday activities. - Participants will have apheresis. Blood will be removed with a needle from one arm. A machine will separate the white blood cells. The blood, minus the white cells, will be returned through a needle in the other arm. - Participants will have 14 visits. At each visit, they will have a physical exam and blood tests. They will discuss any side effects. - Participants will get vaccine injections at weeks 3, 6, 9, 12, 15, and 24. The vaccine will be made from the participants own cells. - Participants will get a Vaccine Report Card to complete after receiving vaccine. - The study lasts 96 weeks.
This study is evaluating the safety, pharmacodynamics (PD), and efficacy of acalabrutinib and pembrolizumab in hematologic malignancies.
The study contains Phase 1A and Phase 1B. Phase 1A has Part1 (BID Dose Escalation) and Part2 (QD Dosing Escalation) Evaluation of a cohort of at least three participants completing one cycle of treatment at that dose level and dose regimen is required prior to determining the next dose level and dose regimen for the next cohort. Phase 1B has PartA (BID Dosing Expansion) will investigate efficacy in participants with selected tumor types and further evaluate safety and tolerability of BGB 290 at recommended dose for future studies. and PartB (Food Effect) will investigate the food effect on the Pharmacokinetics (PK) of BGB 290 in participants with advanced solid tumors.
Endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) with fine needle aspiration (FNA) for cytology and/or fine needle biopsy (FNB) for histology may be used in the diagnostic work-up of intrathoracic and intrabdominal lesion of unknown origin. Certain lesions (such as pancreatic adenocarcinoma) are often well characterized by cytology assessment of FNA-samples while others are not (such as GIST-tumors). This study is a part observational (early study phase) and part interventional study (late study phase) on the diagnostic accuracy of EUS-assisted tissue sampling by FNA or FNB during a 10-year period on a tertiary endoscopy centre.