View clinical trials related to Urinary Bladder Neoplasms.
Filter by:The purpose of this study is to test the safety of gemcitabine applied to the bladder directly combined with different oral doses of everolimus and to assess the right doses. Gemcitabine will be given at a fixed dose. Up to 3 dose levels of everolimus will be evaluated. The purpose of the phase II part is to test the combination of gemcitabine applied to the bladder directly combined with different oral doses of everolimus and to study the effects of these two drugs together. The investigators want to find out what effects, good and/or bad, this treatment has on the patient and the cancer.
The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether a new potential treatment for non invasive bladder cancer is safe and if it leads to side effects such as irregular heart rate, agitation, or burning with urination. Patients who have early stage bladder cancer and will be receiving BCG, a bladder cancer therapy as recommended by a doctor, will be asked to participate in a study where they are given the standard BCG followed by the experimental drug, aminophylline. Although we hope this medicine may one day prove to help bladder cancer patients, at the current time we do not know if it has any benefits at all. We have data in mice that suggest that aminophylline slows the growth of tumors when coupled with BCG.
High doses of gabapentin are associated with pancreatic acinar cell tumors in rats, but there has been no post marketing pancreatic carcinogenicity signal with gabapentin as reported by spontaneous reports in AERS or in the published literature. In a published case-control screening study of the association of gabapentin with 55 cancers, the only cancer that met the screening criteria for possibly increased cancer risk with gabapentin exposure was renal (including renal pelvis) cancer. This association was judged to be likely due to or substantially accentuated by confounding by cigarette smoking, hypertension, and lifestyle (Cancer Causes Control 2009;20:1821-1835). The relationship between gabapentin exposure and pancreatic cancer and renal cancer is studied in NCT01138124, and supplemental analyses for these cancers are performed in the current study. The FDA recommended GSK also study the relationship between gabapentin and all-cancer sites, as well as cancer at the following specific sites: 1) stomach, 2) anus, anal canal, and anorectum, 3) lung and bronchus, 4) bones and joints, 5) breast, 6) penis, 7) urinary bladder, and 8) other nervous system. The primary objective of this study is to determine whether exposure to gabapentin is associated with an increased risk of developing all-cancer, and these specific cancers in the United Kingdom (UK) General Practice Research Database (GPRD). Each member of the UK population is registered with a General Practice, which centralizes the medical information not only from the general practitioners themselves but also from specialist referrals and hospital attendances. Over 487 General Practices contribute data to the GPRD. The study cohort from which cases and controls are drawn is all subjects in the GPRD 1993-2008. Gabapentin was approved in the UK in May 1993. Entry into the study cohort begins Jan 1, 1993 for all those who are registered in GPRD before that time, and at the time of registration if later than Jan 1, 1993. Subjects are excluded from the GPRD cohort if they have a cancer diagnosis or a history of cancer prior to the cohort entry date. Patients with a first diagnosis of the respective cancer 1995-2008 are risk set matched with up to 10 controls within the same General Practice for age at cohort entry (within two years), sex, and year of entry into the study cohort (within one year). For cases, the index date is the date of first diagnosis of the respective cancer. The index date for controls is set as the date at which the follow-up time from cohort entry is the same as the case. The index date is chosen so as to give the control equal follow-up time to that of the case for ascertainment of use of gabapentin. Cases and controls will be required to have at least 2 years of follow-up in the study cohort before their index date. Cases must have no history of any other cancer diagnosis prior to the index date. Controls are required to be free of cancer diagnosis in the database up to the control's index date. Data on gabapentin prescriptions are obtained for cases and controls from study cohort entry to the index date. Gabapentin exposure will be assessed as ever/never, number of prescriptions, cumulative dose, and cumulative duration, with a 2 year lag period incorporated to control for protopathic bias (gabapentin prescription for initial pain symptoms of undiagnosed cancer) and latency (time between cancer onset and specific GPRD cancer diagnosis). Crude and adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) will be produced from conditional logistic regression models, with additional analyses evaluating for dose-response. Covariates include indications for gabapentin use and risk factors for each cancer.
This trial evaluates the therapeutic benefit of extended versus limited lymphadenectomy at the time of radical cystectomy in patients with bladder cancer.
RATIONALE: Drugs used in chemotherapy, such as carboplatin and gemcitabine hydrochloride, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells or by stopping them from dividing. Vandetanib may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth and by blocking blood flow to the tumor. It is not yet known whether giving carboplatin and gemcitabine hydrochloride is more effective with or without vandetanib as first-line therapy in treating urinary tract cancer. PURPOSE: This randomized phase II trial is studying giving carboplatin together with gemcitabine hydrochloride and to see how well it works when given with or without vandetanib as first-line therapy in treating patients with locally advanced or metastatic urinary tract cancer.
The purpose of this study is to compare the recurrence rate at 1 year following Narrow Band Imaging and trans-urethral resection of bladder tumor with White Light and TURB in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer.
RATIONALE: Fiber may lessen bowel side effects caused by radiation therapy. It is not yet known whether a high-fiber diet is more effective than a low-fiber diet in preventing bowel side effects caused by radiation therapy. PURPOSE: This randomized clinical trial is studying a high-fiber diet to see how well it works compared with a low-fiber diet in preventing bowel side effects in patients undergoing radiation therapy for gynecological cancer, bladder cancer, colorectal cancer, or anal cancer.
The study is intended to investigate whether the improved initial detection and resection of bladder cancer lesions in patients with non-muscle invasive bladder cancer with Hexvix (Cysview) fluorescence cystoscopy/TURB will lead to a longer-term reduction in recurrences compared to standard white light cystoscopy/TURB.
The goal of this part (Part 1) of this clinical research study is to learn about the safety of giving 2 doses of SCH 72105 (also known as rAd-IFN) directly into the bladder to patients with bladder cancer that has come back. The goal of Part 2 of this study is to learn about the safety of giving 2 more doses of SCH 72105 directly into the bladder of Part 1 participants who had no sign of bladder cancer after Week 12. The level of effectiveness of SCH 72105 will also be studied by measuring the interferon (IFN) levels in the urine.
This is a multi-institutional, randomized trial evaluating oncologic, perioperative, and functional outcomes following two standard care procedures for radical cystectomy. The participants will have one of the standard care procedures as part of their care. The two procedures that will be followed are open radical cystectomy and robotic assisted radical cystectomy (RARC). Open cystectomy is considered to be the more traditional approach. While newer, RARC is considered to be equivalent to open surgery when it is performed by a trained robotics surgeon. The reported complication rates of RARC appear comparable to open surgery. This means there is no significant difference in the risk between the two standard procedures. However, despite these potential advantages, true comparison between the open and robotic technique with regards to long term cancer related and functional outcomes has not been accomplished because previous studies did not compare patients of equal health status. The researchers hope to learn whether or not patients undergoing RARC recover more quickly than or at the same rate as patients undergoing an open radical cystectomy while having non inferior cancer related outcomes. This study is funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH).