Chuo-ku,, Japan
ImPACT Normative Extension
Phase
N/ASpan
401 weeksSponsor
ImPACT Applications, Inc.Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Healthy Volunteers
JoLT-Ca Sublobar Resection (SR) Versus Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy (SAbR) for Lung Cancer
Stereotactic Ablative Radiotherapy has been shown in single institution phase II and matched cohort studies to be effective at controlling primary early lung cancer. Recent pooled analysis of both the STARS and ROSEL randomized trials comparing SABR versus lobectomy have shown a significantly improved 3-year survival with SABR, giving further impetus for successful completion of a randomized trial . Pre-randomized trial- Patients will be screened and pre-randomized to either SR or SAbR. Informed consent will be obtained after patients are made aware of the randomized assignment. Despite pre-randomization prior to consent, patients maintain their right to accept or decline any/all study activities. Only consenting patients will be allowed to participate in study activities, including observation after either randomized treatments or observation after standard of care treatment, while those declining consent will be managed by their physician(s) off study.Patients will be accrued and followed for a minimum of 2-years after treatment.
Phase
3Span
705 weeksSponsor
University of Texas Southwestern Medical CenterPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
A Clinical Study to Evaluate the Safety, Tolerability, and Immunogenicity of VAX-31 in Healthy Infants
Phase
2Span
136 weeksSponsor
Vaxcyte, Inc.Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Healthy Volunteers
Ramucirumab Plus Pembrolizumab vs Usual Care for Treatment of Stage IV or Recurrent Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Following Immunotherapy, Pragmatica-Lung Study
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To compare overall survival (OS) in participants previously treated with platinum-based chemotherapy and immunotherapy for stage IV or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) randomized to pembrolizumab and ramucirumab versus standard of care. SECONDARY OBJECTIVE: I. To summarize reports of serious and unexpected high-grade (>= grade 3) treatment-related adverse events determined by the treating physician within each treatment arm. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM A: Patients receive chemotherapy per standard of care on study. ARM B: Patients receive ramucirumab intravenously (IV) and pembrolizumab IV on study.
Phase
3Span
262 weeksSponsor
SWOG Cancer Research NetworkPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Testing the Addition of the Drug Apalutamide to the Usual Hormone Therapy and Radiation Therapy After Surgery for Prostate Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. Compare metastasis-free survival (MFS) of salvage radiation therapy (RT) and gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist/antagonist versus (vs.) RT/GnRH agonist/antagonist with apalutamide for patients with pathologic node-positive prostate cancer after radical prostatectomy with detectable prostate-specific antigen (PSA). SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. Compare health-related quality of life (Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC]-26, EuroQol [EQ]-5 Dimension [D]-5 Level [L]), Brief Pain Inventory, Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-Fatigue) among the treatment arms. II. Compare overall survival, biochemical progression-free survival, time to local-regional progression, time to castrate resistance, and cancer-specific survival among the treatment arms. III. Compare the short-term and long-term treatment-related adverse events among the treatment arms. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. Validate Decipher score for an exclusively node-positive population and use additional genomic information from Affymetrix Human Exon 1.0st array to develop and validate novel prognostic and predictive biomarkers. II. Validate the PAM50-based classification of prostate cancer into luminal A, luminal B, and basal subtypes as prognostic markers and determine whether the luminal B subtype is a predictive marker for having a larger improvement in outcome from the addition of apalutamide. III. To optimize quality assurance methodologies and processes for radiotherapy and imaging with machine learning strategies. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients receive standard of care hormone therapy per physician discretion for 24 months. Patients also undergo standard of care pelvis and prostate bed radiation therapy 5 days per week over 5-6 or 7-8 weeks beginning within 90 days of randomization in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM II: Patients undergo standard of care hormone therapy and radiation therapy as in Arm I. Patients also receive apalutamide orally (PO) once daily (QD) on days 1-90. Cycles repeat every 90 days for 8 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 6 months for 3 years, then annually thereafter.
Phase
3Span
348 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
S1827 (MAVERICK) Testing Whether the Use of Brain Scans Alone Instead of Brain Scans Plus Preventive Brain Radiation Affects Lifespan in Patients With Small Cell Lung Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To evaluate whether overall survival (OS) with magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) surveillance alone is not inferior to MRI surveillance combined with prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) for the treatment of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) rate up to 12 months after randomization between the arms. II. To compare brain-metastasis-free survival between the arms. III. To compare OS between the arms within the subgroups of patients with limited-stage and extensive-stage disease. IV. To compare cognitive failure free survival (CFFS) rates at the assessment times between the arms. V. To compare the cumulative incidence of cognitive failure with death as a competing risk between the arms. VI. To compare the frequency and severity of toxicities between the two arms. ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVE: I. To collect blood for banking. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients undergo conventional or hippocampal avoidance PCI over 20 minutes 5 days per week for 2 weeks. Patients also undergo MRI scan at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months. ARM II: Patients undergo MRI scan at 3, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 months.
Phase
3Span
393 weeksSponsor
SWOG Cancer Research NetworkPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Letrozole With or Without Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in Treating Patients With Stage II-IV Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, or Primary Peritoneal Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To examine if letrozole monotherapy/maintenance (L/L) is non-inferior to intravenous (IV) paclitaxel/carboplatin and maintenance letrozole (CT/L) with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) in women with stage II-IV primary low-grade serous carcinoma of the ovary or peritoneum after primary surgical cytoreduction. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare the nature, frequency and maximum degree of toxicity as assessed by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version (v) 5.0 for each treatment arm. II. To compare the relative frequency of objective tumor response in those with measurable disease after cytoreductive surgery for each treatment arm. III. To compare overall survival for each treatment arm. IV. To compare the CT/L and L/L arms with respect to patients' adherence to letrozole therapy as measured by pill counts. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients receive paclitaxel IV over 3 hours and carboplatin IV on day 1. Cycles repeat every 21 days for up to 6 cycles. Patients then receive letrozole orally (PO) once daily (QD) in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients undergo blood collection and tumor biopsy during screening as well as medical imaging throughout the study. ARM II: Patients receive letrozole PO QD. Cycles repeat every 21 days for up to 6 cycles. Patients then receive letrozole orally PO QD in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity as maintenance therapy. Patients undergo blood collection and tumor biopsy during screening as well as medical imaging throughout the study. After completion of study treatment/intervention, patients/participants are followed up every 3 months for 1 year, then every 6 months for 3 years, then annually thereafter.
Phase
3Span
437 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Lung-MAP: A Master Screening Protocol for Previously-Treated Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
Primary Objective of the Master Protocol (LUNGMAP) The primary objective of this screening study is to test patient specimens to determine eligibility for participation in the biomarker-driven and non-matched sub-studies included within the Lung-MAP umbrella protocol. Secondary Objectives 1. Screening Success Rate Objective To evaluate the screen success rate defined as the percentage of screened patients that register for a therapeutic sub-study. Screen success rates will be evaluated for the total screened population and by the subset of patients screened following progression on previous therapy or pre-screened on current therapy. 2. Translational Medicine Objectives 1. To evaluate circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and compare to the FMI Foundation tissue molecular profiling results in patients who submit a new biopsy for screening. 2. To establish a tissue/blood repository. Ancillary Study S1400GEN Objectives The Lung-MAP Screening Study includes an ancillary study evaluating patient and physician attitudes regarding the return of somatic mutation findings suggestive of a germline mutation. Participation in this study is optional. 1. Primary Objective To evaluate patient attitudes and preferences about return of somatic mutation findings suggestive of a germline mutation in the Lung-MAP Screening Study. 2. Secondary Objectives 1. To evaluate Lung-MAP study physician attitudes and preferences about return of somatic mutation findings suggestive of a germline mutation in the Lung-MAP Screening Study. 2. To evaluate Lung-MAP patients' and study physicians' knowledge of cancer genomics. 3. To evaluate Lung-MAP patients' and study physicians' knowledge of the design of the Lung-MAP Screening Study. 4. To explore whether physician and patient knowledge of cancer genomics and attitudes and preferences about return of genomic profiling findings are correlated.
Phase
2/3Span
521 weeksSponsor
SWOG Cancer Research NetworkPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Regional Radiotherapy in Biomarker Low-Risk Node Positive and T3N0 Breast Cancer
Women with node positive breast cancer normally will receive endocrine therapy and some may receive chemotherapy to help prevent the cancer from coming back. Many women will also receive radiotherapy to the whole breast/chest area and the surrounding lymph glands (called regional radiotherapy). No one really knows whether patients with low risk breast cancer need to receive regional radiotherapy. Some women may be getting regional radiotherapy who do not need it. These women may be exposed to the side effects of their treatment without benefit.
Phase
3Span
481 weeksSponsor
Canadian Cancer Trials GroupPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting
Two Studies for Patients With Unfavorable Intermediate Risk Prostate Cancer Testing Less Intense Treatment for Patients With a Low Gene Risk Score and Testing a More Intense Treatment for Patients With a Higher Gene Risk Score, The Guidance Trial
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To determine whether men with National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) unfavorable intermediate risk (UIR) prostate cancer and lower Decipher genomic risk (Decipher score < 0.40) treated with radiation therapy (RT) alone instead of 6 months androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) + RT experience non-inferior rate of distant metastasis. (De-intensification study) II. To determine whether men with NCCN UIR prostate cancer who are in the higher genomic risk (Decipher score >= 0.40) will have a superior metastasis-free survival through treatment intensification with darolutamide added to the standard of RT plus 6 months ADT. (Intensification study) SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare overall survival (OS) between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. II. To compare time to prostate specific antigen (PSA) failure between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. III. To compare metastasis free survival (MFS) based on conventional imaging between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and de-intensification intervention (RT alone). IV. To compare MFS based on either conventional and/or molecular imaging between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. V. To compare cumulative incidence of locoregional failure based upon conventional imaging and/ or biopsy between standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. VI. To compare cumulative incidence of distant metastasis based upon conventional imaging between standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and intensification intervention (RT plus 6 months ADT plus darolutamide). VII. To compare cumulative incidence of distant metastasis based upon either conventional and/or molecular imaging between standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. VIII. To compare prostate cancer-specific mortality between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. IX. To compare sexual and hormonal related quality of life, as measured by the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC), between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. X. To compare fatigue, as measured by the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS)-Fatigue instrument, between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. XI. To compare cognition, as measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Cognitive (FACT-Cog) perceived cognitive abilities subscale, between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare changes in cardio-metabolic markers, including body mass index, lipids, blood glucose, complete blood count (CBC), comprehensive metabolic panel (CMP), and hemoglobin (Hgb) A1c, between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. II. To compare PSA failure-free survival with non-castrate testosterone and no additional therapies between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. III. To compare cumulative incidence of locoregional failure based upon either conventional and/or molecular imaging between standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. IV. To compare castrate-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. V. To compare bowel and urinary function related quality of life, as measured by the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-26 (EPIC), between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. VI. To compare time to testosterone recovery (defined as a T > 200ng/dL) between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. VII. To compare health utilities, as measured by the European Quality of Life Five Dimension Five Level Scale (EQ-5D-5L), between the standard of care (RT plus 6 months of ADT) and either the de-intensification (RT alone) or intensification (RT plus 6 months of ADT plus darolutamide) interventions. VIII. To develop and assess a machine learning/artificial intelligence algorithm for radiotherapy planning and/or quality assurance. IX. To perform future translational correlative studies using biological data, Decipher results, and clinical outcomes. OUTLINE: DE-INTENSIFICATION STUDY: Patients with Decipher score < 0.40 are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients undergo radiation therapy (RT) using a recognized regimen (2-3 days a week or 5 days a week for 2-11 weeks) in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM II: Patients undergo RT as Arm I. Patients also receive androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) consisting of leuprolide, goserelin, buserelin, histrelin, triptorelin, degarelix, or relugolix at the discretion of the treating physician, for 6 months in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients may also receive bicalutamide or flutamide for 0, 30 or 180 days. INTENSIFICATION STUDY: Patients with Decipher score >= 0.40 are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM III: Patients receive treatment as in Arm II. ARM IV: Patients receive RT and ADT as in Arm II. Patients also receive darolutamide orally (PO) twice daily (BID). Treatment repeats every 90 days for up to 2 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up at 3, 6, 12, 24, 36, 48 and 60 months.
Phase
3Span
258 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyPittsburgh, Pennsylvania
Recruiting