View clinical trials related to Neuroendocrine Tumors.
Filter by:This is a Phase 1/2, open-label, first-in-human (FIH) study designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and preliminary antineoplastic activity of pralsetinib (BLU-667) administered orally in participants with medullary thyroid cancer (MTC), RET-altered NSCLC and other RET-altered solid tumors.
The purpose of this study is to learn if a new drug, ONC201 can make tumors become smaller or go away completely. Investigators also want to learn if ONC201 can prevent new deposits of cancer from appearing in new places in participants (metastases). A phase 2 study of ONC201 in PC-PG (pheochromocytoma-paraganglioma) and other neuroendocrine tumors will determine whether inhibition of DRD2 (a member of the dopamine receptor family) is safe in unresectable, recurrent, locally advanced, refractory, or metastatic neuroendocrine cancers including PC-PG, desmoplastic small round cell tumor (DSRCT), Ewing sarcoma (PNET) or any other neuroendicrine tumor with a catecholamine or dopamine biomarker or autocrine or paracrine dependence on dopamine including cholangiocarcinoma and adrenal cortical carcinoma. ONC201 is an investigational (experimental) agent and has a favorable safety profile in phase 1 and early phase 2 clinical trials in advanced cancers. This study design has been chosen to see whether ONC201 is associated with reduction of anti-hypertension medications, safety and significant efficacy against neuroendocrine tumors, especially PC-PG.
Metastatic (HR-positive, HER2-negative) breast cancer (BC), advanced or unresectable neuroendocrine tumours of pancreatic (pNET), gastrointestinal or lung origin and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are diseases with poor outcome. Everolimus increases patients' median progression-free survival (PFS) with 4.6 months in metastatic BC (mBC), 7 months in (p)NET and 3 months in mRCC. However, serious adverse events (AEs) occur frequently. This reduces effectiveness of everolimus, because AEs are managed with dose reductions, treatment interruptions or even complete discontinuation of everolimus. Therapeutic-drug-monitoring (TDM) is used to adjust the prescribed daily dose, to maintain effective everolimus whole blood concentrations, with the lowest possible risk of AEs. While everolimus TDM has been common in transplantation medicine, it has not been implemented in oncology. The importance of TDM in oncology is supported by previous research which showed that a 2-fold increased everolimus whole blood trough concentration was associated with a short-term risk of grade ≥ 3 pneumonitis, stomatitis and metabolic events. Moreover, an exposure-toxicity relationship of everolimus in patients with thyroid cancer was observed, since initial everolimus concentrations could be associated with early toxicity (< 12 weeks, e.g. stomatitis). However, the association between initial everolimus measurements and long-term AEs (≥12 weeks, e.g. pneumonitis, anorexia and anemia) of any grade and the need for everolimus dose reductions could not be made. Since levels ±>18 µg/L were associated with toxicity, the investigators assume that the upper therapeutic window of everolimus in the oncologic setting will be ±18 µg/L. Similarly, a tendency to improved PFS and overall survival was observed when Cmin in steady state was above 14.1 μg/L. This seems to be the lower limit of the therapeutic window. Before consensus about the feasibility of everolimus TDM in the oncologic setting can be achieved, a number of questions (the knowledge gaps) need to be answered: 1. It is unknown whether everolimus whole blood trough levels (over time) predict long-term AEs. 2. The optimal concentration range for everolimus, with the treatment of mBC, mRCC, or (p)NET is unknown, especially the upper limit associated with toxicity. 3. It is unknown what everolimus concentration level is associated with the need for everolimus dose reductions.
Neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) and carcinomas account for 10-15 % of all pancreatic incidentalomas. The management of pancreatic NETs depends on tumor stage and on presence or not of hormonal syndrome. The therapeutic approach for hormonally functional tumor, or large tumor (> 2 cm) with local, vascular or lymph nodes invasion, highly suggestive of malignancy, or in presence of metastasis, is well admitted: surgery is indicated or should be discussed. However, the attitude is less consensual for small (≤ 2 cm) non-functioning (NF) and non-metastatic lesions. In English, American or French recommendations, systematic surgical resection with lymphadenectomy is currently recommended in all medically fit patients. The follow-up (FU) is possible for tumors <2 cm (T1) located in the pancreatic head and for which enucleation is not feasible. Several recently published retrospective studies discuss the "non- surgical" management of the small NF incidentally detected pancreatic NETs (IPNETs) and highlight the necessity of developing guidelines for management of these patients. A strict correlation between tumor size and malignancy of these tumors was demonstrated in the single-center retrospective Italian study of Bettini and col., which included all patients with NF PNETs who underwent curative (R0) resection during 18 years. In the group of 51 patients with small size of T (2 cm or less), incidentally discovered, the majority of lesion was benign, and the authors concluded that follow-up can be proposed in patients with incidentally discovered NF PNETs ≤ 2 cm. However in despite of small size and asymptomatic character of the tumor, the rate of malignancy of NF IPNETs ≤ 2 cm was estimated to be 24 % (in 18% and 6% of cases, uncertain behaviour and carcinoma were present). Given the inherent morbidities associated with pancreatic surgery, a risk-benefit calculation may favour surveillance rather than surgery in highly selected patients. Thus, a better understanding of NF IPNETs and identification of their prognostic factors can be of help to select a subgroup of patients who could benefit from a long-term surveillance rather than a systematic surgical resection. Clearly, large prospective trials are needed to validate this approach.
An observational time and motion study in a clinical oncology setting is utilized in order to measure and compare product attributes and overall product efficiency between lanreotide and octreotide LAR.
This is a single center, open label, phase I study involving grade I-III gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, consisting of a dose escalation Part A followed by an expansion cohort Part B. On Part A Patients will be treated with daily oral everolimus. Fosbretabulin will be administered IV either q3 weekly or q weekly based on PO CRM cohort. Part B: Once the investigators have established an MTD in Part A, the investigators will be treating 15 more patients at that dose combination. The primary and secondary objectives of the expansion cohort will be similar to Part A of the study, i.e., to establish a safety profile of the experimental drug combination and to collect and assess efficacy data. Patients will be treated with concurrent everolimus and fosbretabulin for 12 weeks.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effect of different surgical resections (R0, R1, R2) on circulating NET transcripts (PCR score or NETest). A drop in circulating NET levels will be correlated with surgical excision. Secondly, variation of circulating NET transcripts will be correlated to NET recurrence to test whether this analysis may constitute an early predictive marker of disease relapse.
This trial studies how well gallium Ga 68-edotreotide (68Ga-DOTA-TOC) positron emission tomography (PET)/computer tomography (CT) works in imaging participants with neuroendocrine tumors. 68Ga-DOTA-TOC is used as a tracer chemical during PET/CT scans. Diagnostic procedures, such as 68Ga-DOTA-TOC PET/CT, may help find and diagnose neuroendocrine tumors.
Background Treatment and control of cancer is associated with high costs, to patients in the form of side effects and discomfort during investigations, to society in the form of expensive drugs and studies. Circulating tumor cells (CTC) has received great attention as a cancer biomarker in trying to estimate future course in patients with breast cancer, colon cancer and prostate cancer. CTC is believed to be a crucial step in cancer spreading to the bloodstream and giving rise to metastases. Detection of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) specifically adds specificity to the analysis of the CTC. The investigators would like to with molecular biological methods predict which patients requires special monitoring and individualized therapy and explore these tests as clinical decision support. Purpose and method In a blood sample from patients with neuro-endocrine tumor (NET) and hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), the investigators will by cell separation, flow cytometry and DNA sequencing and digital polymerase chain reaction (PCR): 1. Identify and isolate the CTC and investigate these for tumor-specific mutations. 2. Quantify ctDNA and analyze this for specific mutations, which in the past has been found frequent in NET and HCC. 3. Compare findings of mutations on CTC and ctDNA with mutations in tissue biopsies. The results are compared with the clinical data on disease course, including the effect of treatment and survival. Subjects 40 Patients with small intestinal/unknown primary NET before treatment with somatostatin analogues 30 patients with pancreatic NET before treatment with Everolimus 30 patients with presumed radically treated HCC 30 patients with HCC in treatment with Sorafenib A blood sample will be taken prior to the start of treatment, after 1 month after start of treatment and thereafter every 3.-6. month for up to two years. Perspectives In several cancer types molecular diagnostics have had significant influence in treatment and control strategy. The goal is in future to be able to take advantage of a so-called "liquid biopsy" as clinical decision support. The study will bring new knowledge to this growing field of research.
This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of PDR001 in patients with advanced or metastatic, well-differentiated, non-functional neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic, gastrointestinal (GI), or thoracic origin or poorly-differentiated gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine carcinoma (GEP-NEC) that progressed on prior treatment.