View clinical trials related to Stomach Neoplasm.
Filter by:This is a phase II study to evaluate RAD001 (Everolimus) in terms of 4-month progression-free survival rate (primary end-point) and response rate, toxicity, overall survival and biomarker assessment (secondary end-points) in patients with metastatic or recurrent gastric cancer with pS6 Ser 240/4 expression. Eligibility criteria include pathologically proven non-resectable adenocarcinoma of stomach with measurable disease who failed previous first-line palliative chemotherapy including fluoropyrimidine and platinum with high expression of pS6 Ser 240/4. Oral RAD001 (everolimus) 10mg daily will be administered and the dose will be adjusted according to the observed clinical toxicities. Treatment will be continued until disease progression or patient's intolerability to the study drug. A study requires 40 assessable subjects to decide whether the proportion of patients who are free from progression at 4 months (16 weeks), P, is less than or equal to 0.1 or greater than or equal to 0.25 with a target error rate of 0.05 and β of 0.2. If the number of responses is 7 or less, the hypothesis that P >= 0.250 is rejected with a target error rate of 0.200 and an actual error rate of 0.182. If the investigators assume that drop-out rate is 10%, total accrual patient will be 45.
The purpose of this study is to compare the short- and long-term results between the laparoscopy-assisted gastrectomy and the open gastrectomy.
Peritoneal metastases appear in a great proportion of patients affected by gastric carcinoma. Involved mechanisms are poorly understood though experimentally it has been demonstrated that neoplastic cells exfoliated from primary tumor can only implant and proliferate in areas of damaged peritoneum. Objectives: to study ultra-structure of peritoneal surface by electronic microscopy in control subjects and in patients with early or locally advanced gastric cancer looking for spontaneous changes in peritoneal surface not related with surgical injury.
Among surgical methods for gastric cancer, incision about 15 ~20 cm length is prepared for open gastric cancer surgery while 0.5 ~ 1.2 cm is for laparoscopy gastric cancer surgery. Complications such as pain, abdominal adhesion, and problems associated with delayed recovery are common in open surgery because of large incision; however, those complications are less common in laparoscopy surgery because small sized incision is prepared. Range of surgery for curative dissection depends on the level of progress of a cancer, i.e., depends on whether gastric wall invasion, lymph node metastasis, or invasion to adjacent organs presented. Since recurrence in the lymph nodes after the operation is very common, the most important step in the gastric surgery is to dissect lymph node completely. According to the gastric cancer surgery manual published by Japan Gastric Cancer Association, more than D2 lymph node dissection is essential for improving survival rate in advanced gastric cancer. More than D2 lymph node dissection is relatively safely conducted by open surgery, whereas it is controversial in laparoscopy surgery because it is very hard to maintain surgical field under laparoscopic condition. Recently, widened rage of lymph node dissection by using laparoscopy is possible as laparoscopic surgical techniques are accumulated and new surgical devices are introduced. According to the case reports, D2 lymph node dissection by laparoscopy surgery shows similar results to the one by open surgery in aspects of recurrence rate and the number of dissected lymph node. Also, according to Hur and el., in case of upper gastric cancer, laparoscopy surgery is more useful to dissect #10 and #11 lymph node.In our prospective case study, the investigators would like to compare effectiveness, complications, patterns of recurrence, and survival rate between the two surgical approaches, laparoscopy distal gastrectomy and open distal gastrectomy. The investigators randomly operate the advanced gastric cancer patients, who need distal gastrectomy and D2 lymph node dissection. Surgical methods are selected randomly whether open surgery or laparoscopy surgery. Finally, the investigators wish our case report to contribute to the establishment of the safety and the effectiveness of laparoscopy surgery conducted for advanced gastric cancers. Consequently, our case report will contribute to establish the ideal surgical method for the advanced gastric cancer patients.
This is a phase II study to evaluate RAD001 (Everolimus) in terms of 4-month progression-free survival rate (primary end-point) and response rate, toxicity, and overall survival (secondary end-points) in patients with metastatic and/or advanced inoperable gastric cancer. Eligibility criteria include histologically proven gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer who failed previous first-line standard treatment with fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy. Oral RAD001 (everolimus) 10mg daily will be administered and the dose will be adjusted according to the observed clinical toxicities. Treatment will be continued until disease progression or patient's intolerability to the study drug. Total of 54 patients will be enrolled to decide whether the proportion of patients who are free from progression at 4 months (16 weeks), P, is less that or equal to 0.15 or greater than or equal to 0.30 to assess the treatment outcome in 48 patients assuming drop-out rate, 10%.
To evaluate the efficacy and safety of weekly administered combination of docetaxel/cisplatin and docetaxel/oxaliplatin in chemotherapy-naïve patients with advanced gastric cancer. The primary endpoint will be the response rate.
Patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer can benefit from palliative chemotherapy. However, over half of patients with metastatic gastric cancer who received chemotherapy failed to achieve response and even in these responders, the duration of responses was as short as a few months. Patients with metastatic gastric cancer who fail to respond or have relapse after first line chemotherapy have a grim prognosis and a standard salvage treatment is not available. We designed this phase II trial to determine the efficacy and safety of irinotecan monotherapy or combination (ILF) as second-line therapy for advanced gastric cancer.
To compare the combination of irinotecan, leucovorin and 5-FU (ILF) with ILF plus cisplatin (PILF) as first-line chemotherapy in patients with measurable metastatic gastric cancer.
Phase II: Primary objective: to select one of the 2 test arms (docetaxel with cisplatin, docetaxel with cisplatin and 5-FU), based primarily on complete responses, to advance to a phase III survival comparison against the CDDP + 5-FU control arm. Secondary objective: to evaluate the quantitative and qualitative safety profile of the 2 test groups. Phase III: Primary objective: to detect a statistically significant increase in time to progression (TTP) for the test arm (docetaxel plus cisplatin and 5-FU) relative to the control arm (cisplatin plus 5-FU). Main secondary objective: to detect a statistically significant increase in overall survival (OS) for the test arm (docetaxel plus cisplatin and 5-FU) relative to the control arm (cisplatin plus 5-FU). Other secondary objectives: to compare response rates, time to treatment failure, duration of response, safety profiles, quality of life and disease-related symptoms.Socio-economic data will be collected in order to be able to perform an analysis by country when necessary.
The median survival at progression after first-line chemotherapy for metastatic gastric cancer is about 2.5 months. There are no data which a possible benefit of second line therapy. for this reason a trial which investigates a possible benefit or chemotherapy compared to best supportive care as second line treatment is urgently necessary. Irinotecan shows response rates of 20% in the first line therapy with high rates od disease stabilization. There are few trials investigating irinotecan in the second line setting. Response rates of 20% are reported in tis setting. Irinotecan is supplied without costs from the company Pfizer.