Czluchów, Poland

Prospective Research Assessment in Multiple Myeloma: An Observational Evaluation (PREAMBLE)

S1803, Lenalidomide +/- Daratumumab/rHuPh20 as Post-ASCT Maintenance for MM w/MRD to Direct Therapy Duration

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.

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.

Lenalidomide, and Dexamethasone With or Without Daratumumab in Treating Patients With High-Risk Smoldering Myeloma

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare overall survival in patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma randomized to daratumumab-lenalidomide (revlimid)-dexamethasone or revlimid-dexamethasone. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare progression-free survival and response rates between arms. II. To evaluate safety and compare toxicity rates between arms. III. To monitor incidence of infusion-related reactions over the first cycle of daratumumab. IV. To evaluate stem cell mobilization failure and early stem cell mobilization feasibility. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To measure treatment exposure and adherence. II. To estimate treatment duration and time to progression. PATIENT-REPORTED OUTCOMES OBJECTIVES: I. To compare change in health-related quality of life (Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy [FACT]- General [G]]) from baseline to end of study therapy between arms. II. To compare change in FACT-G scores from treatment end to 6-months post-treatment end between arms. III. To describe changes in FACT-G scores over study therapy and shortly after treatment discontinuation and evaluate correlation with survival. IV. To evaluate attributes of select patient reported treatment-emergent symptomatic adverse events (Patient Reported Outcomes [PRO]-Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE]) longitudinally. V. To derive an overall PRO-CTCAE score at each assessment time point. VI. To measure the likelihood of medication adherence (ASK-12) at 6 month intervals throughout treatment. VII. To assess the association of overall PRO-CTCAE score with FACT-G score. VIII. To compare select PRO-CTCAE items and related provider-reported CTCAEs. IX. To evaluate association between treatment adherence and Adherence Starts with Knowledge 12 (ASK-12) score. X. To assess correlation of treatment adherence and ASK-12 score with FACT-G score. XI. To tabulate PRO compliance and completion rates. LABORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare minimal residual disease negative rate after 12 cycles of study therapy between arms. II. To compare minimal residual disease (MRD) positive to negative conversion rates from 12 cycles to end of treatment between arms. III. To examine patterns of change in minimal residual disease levels during study therapy. IV. To evaluate agreement and discordance between methods determining disease-free status. V. To assess the prognostic value of minimal residual disease status at 12 cycles for overall and progression-free survival. IMAGING OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate the association of baseline fludeoxyglucose F-18 (FDG)-positron emission tomography (PET)/computed tomography (CT) imaging with progression-free survival. II. To assess the ability of baseline FDG-PET/CT to predict minimal residual disease status after 12 cycles of study therapy and at the end of study therapy. III. To describe the results of subsequent FDG-PET/CT imaging studies in the subset of patients with baseline abnormal FDG-PET/CT, and to associate these results with progression-free survival (PFS). OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients receive daratumumab intravenously (IV) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of courses 1-2, days 1 and 15 of courses 3-6, and day 1 of courses 7-24. Patients also receive lenalidomide orally (PO) daily on days 1-21 and dexamethasone PO on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in courses 1-12. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 24 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM II: Patients receive lenalidomide PO daily on days 1-21 and dexamethasone PO on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of courses 1-12. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 24 courses in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After completion of study, patients will be followed up every 3, 6 or 12 months for up to 15 years from study entry.

Genetic Testing in Guiding Treatment for Patients With Brain Metastases

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To determine the activity of a CDK inhibitor in patients with progressive brain metastases derived from lung cancer, breast cancer, and other cancers harboring actionable genetic alterations associated with sensitivity to CDK inhibitors as measured by response rate (Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology [RANO] criteria). II. To determine the activity of a PI3K inhibitor in patients with progressive brain metastases derived from lung cancer, breast cancer, and other cancers harboring actionable genetic alterations in the PI3K pathway as measured by response rate (RANO criteria). III: To determine the activity of an NTRK/ROS1 inhibitor in patients with progressive brain metastases derived from lung cancer harboring actionable NTRK/ROS1 gene fusions as measured by response rate (RANO criteria). IV. To determine the activity of an KRAS G12C inhibitor in patients with progressive brain metastases derived from lung cancer, and other cancers harboring a KRAS G12C mutation as measured by response rate (RANO criteria). SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate the systemic response by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) criteria in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. II. To evaluate the clinical benefit rate (complete response [CR] + partial response [PR] + stable disease [SD]) by Brain Metastases (BM)-RANO for central nervous system (CNS) in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. III. To evaluate the clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) by RECIST for extracranial disease in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. IV. To evaluate the duration of response by BM-RANO in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. V. To evaluate the duration of response by RECIST in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. VI. To evaluate the progression-free survival for intracranial disease in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. VII. To evaluate the progression-free survival for extracranial disease in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. VIII. To evaluate the site of first progression (CNS versus [vs] non-CNS) in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. IX. To evaluate the overall survival in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. X. To evaluate the toxicity profile of agents in patients with brain metastases in each of the cohorts determined by treatment and primary cancer type. OUTLINE: Patients are assigned to 1 of 4 arms. ARM I (CDK GENE MUTATION): Patients receive abemaciclib orally (PO) twice daily (BID) on days 1-28. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM II (PI3K GENE MUTATION): Patients receive PI3K inhibitor paxalisib PO once daily (QD) on days 1-28. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM III (NTRK/ROS1 GENE MUTATION): Patients receive entrectinib PO QD on days 1-28. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM IV (KRAS G12C MUTATION): Patients receive adagrasib (MRTX849) PO BID on days 1-28. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 8 weeks for 2 years, then every 3 months for years 3-4, and then every 6 months thereafter for up to 5 years after registration.

A Study of Tildrakizumab in Pediatric Subjects With Chronic Plaque Psoriasis

Evaluation of Dosing Procedures of Chemotherapy Treatment (Carboplatin) With the Contrast Agent Iohexol

PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. Evaluate the success of targeting a carboplatin area under the curve (AUC) with our current approach to dosing carboplatin. II. Assess the performance of Cockcroft-Gault (CG), four-variable Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD-4), and Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) based on isotope dilution mass spectrometry (IDMS) calibrated serum creatinine in predicting measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) in patients with cancer. III. Define the relationship of mGFR and carboplatin clearance in patients with cancer. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. Evaluate the divergence of estimated (e)GFR from mGFR based on patient demographic and other characteristics, thus identifying those most likely to benefit from determination of mGFR over use of eGFR. II. Determine the success rate of achieving the target carboplatin AUC in patients in whom the carboplatin dose is capped. III. Evaluate the relationship between carboplatin exposure and toxicity. IV. Assess the ability of markers other than creatinine in pre-treatment serum to better estimate kidney function in patients with cancer. OUTLINE: Patients receive iohexol intravenously (IV) over 30-60 seconds. Patients then receive standard of care carboplatin IV. Patients also undergo collection of 7-8 blood samples for analysis. After completion of study, patients are followed up for 3-4 weeks.