View clinical trials related to Sinonasal Carcinoma.
Filter by:This is a prospective, multi-center, open-label, non-randomized, multi-arm phase II trial to evaluate the efficacy of combination therapy with pembrolizumab and cetuximab for patients with recurrent/metastatic HNSCC. There will be four patient cohorts, including a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-naïve, cetuximab-naïve arm (Cohort 1), a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-refractory, cetuximab-naïve arm (Cohort 2), a PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor-refractory, cetuximab-refractory arm (Cohort 3), and a cutaneous HNSCC arm (Cohort 4). A total of 83 patients (33 in Cohort 1, 25 in Cohort 2, 15 in Cohort 3, and 10 in Cohort 4) will be eligible to enroll. Patients will be enrolled at 4 sites: UC San Diego Moores Cancer Center, UC Los Angeles Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center, and University of Washington Siteman Cancer Center.
The purpose of this study is to test the hypothesis that 1)intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) or proton radiation therapy would result in improved local control rate and lowered toxicity compared to conventional radiotherapy, and 2) proton radiation therapy would result in equivalent or improved local control rate with similar or lower toxicity compared to IMRT, in the treatment of locally advanced sinonasal malignancy. Data from retrospective studies suggest that IMRT or proton radiation therapy resulted in promising outcome in patients with sinonasal malignancy. To this date, no prospective study has been conducted to evaluate the outcome of sinonasal cancer treated with IMRT or proton radiation therapy. This Phase II trial is the first prospective study conducted to determine the treatment outcome and toxicity of IMRT or proton in the treatment of sinonasal cancer. IMRT and proton radiation therapy are the two most established and most commonly employed advanced radiotherapy techniques for the treatment of sinonasal cancer. It is highly controversial whether one is superior to the other in terms of local control and toxicity outcome. It is also not clear if a subset of patients would benefit more from one treatment technology versus the other. Due to the rarity and heterogeneity of sinonasal malignancies and the fact that proton beam is only available at a few centers in the United States, it is not feasible at present to do a Phase III study randomizing patients between IMRT and proton radiation therapy. In this study, a planned secondary analysis will be performed, comparing the treatment and toxicity outcome between IMRT and proton. The data on the IMRT and proton comparison from this trial will be used to design future multi-center prospective trials and to determine if randomized trial is necessary. In this study, the treatment technique employed for an individual case will not be determined by the treating physician(s), but rather by the most advanced technology available at the treating institution for the treatment of the sinonasal cancer. At the Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), proton beam therapy will be used for patients who meet the eligibility criteria. For institutions where protons are not available or institutions where the proton planning systems have not been optimized, IMRT exclusively will be used for the treatment of sinonasal cancer. Patient and tumor characteristics are expected to be comparable between IMRT- and proton- institutions