Testing Olaparib for One or Two Years, With or Without Bevacizumab, to Treat Ovarian Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To determine investigator assessed progression-free survival using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) version (v)1.1 (non-inferiority) for one versus (vs.) two years of maintenance olaparib. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate overall survival (OS360) in the modified intent to treat (ITT) population, with time at risk for progression/death starting 360 days after randomization. II. To evaluate progression-free survival (PFS), PFS2 and overall survival (OS) in the ITT population. III. To evaluate PFS, PFS2, and OS in the as-treated population. IV. To evaluate toxicity, including rates of myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), acute myeloid leukemia (AML), and other secondary malignancies, in the safety population. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVE: I. To evaluate the moderating effect of physician-choice bevacizumab (as stratified) on randomized treatment effect estimates. TRANSLATIONAL OBJECTIVES: I. To assess BRCA reversion mutations in circulating tumor deoxyribonucleic acid (ctDNA) as a predictor of poor response in the BRCA mutated (BRCAm) population. II. To correlate a combined assay assessing quantitative BRCA1 and RAD51C promoter methylation and pathogenic variants in core homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes with clinical homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) testing and outcomes in the BRCA wildtype (BRCAwt) population. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I (REFERENCE): Patients receive olaparib orally (PO) twice daily (BID) on days 1-21 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 21 days for up to 2 years in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients may also receive bevacizumab IV on day 1 of each cycle. Cycles of bevacizumab repeat every 21 days for up to 1 year in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo blood sample collection and computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) throughout the study. ARM II (EXPERIMENTAL): Patients receive olaparib PO BID on days 1-21 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 21 days for up to 1 year in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients may also receive bevacizumab IV on day 1 of each cycle. Cycles of bevacizumab repeat every 21 days for up to 1 year in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo blood sample collection and CT and/or MRI throughout the study. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 3 months for 2 years, then every 6 months for 3 years.
Phase
3Span
512 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Triptorelin for the Prevention of Ovarian Damage in Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. Determine the feasibility of conducting a cross network, multi-site, randomized clinical trial of triptorelin among newly diagnosed adolescent and young adult (AYA) female cancer patients age < 40 years (exclusive of breast cancer). II. Measure ovarian reserve via anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) at 2-years post completion of alkylating agent-containing chemotherapy among randomized patients. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. Collect information on the longitudinal trajectory of change in AMH and other ovarian hormone levels from cancer diagnosis to 2 years post cancer treatment completion among randomized patients. II. Determine the feasibility of measuring estrogen deprivation symptoms (i.e., hot flashes, sexual dysfunction) menstrual pattern, and quality of life among randomized patients. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVE: I. Establish a unique cohort of female AYA patients treated with alkylating agent chemotherapy and randomized to receive or not receive triptorelin, that can be followed long-term to study reproductive health concerns and outcomes as well as genetic risk factors for premature menopause. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM A: Patients receive triptorelin intramuscularly (IM) up to 14 days prior to standard chemotherapy. For patients whose chemotherapy exceeds 24 weeks, a second dose of triptorelin may be given 24 weeks after the first dose at the treating physician's discretion. Patients also undergo blood sample collection throughout the study. ARM B: Patients receive standard chemotherapy. Patients also undergo blood sample collection throughout the study. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up at 1 and 2 years.
Phase
3Span
244 weeksSponsor
Children's Oncology GroupNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Cost Communication and Financial Navigation in Cancer Patients (COSTCOM)
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To compare patient-reported cost-related cancer care non-adherence at 12 months after completion of baseline survey between the enhanced usual care (EUC) and CostCOM study arms. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare patient-reported material financial hardship at 12 months after completion of baseline survey between the EUC and CostCOM study arms. II. To compare patient-reported financial worry at 12 months after completion of baseline survey between the EUC and CostCOM study arms. III. To compare patient-reported quality of life at 12 months after completion of baseline survey between the EUC and CostCOM study arms. IV. To compare patient satisfaction with care at 12 months after completion of baseline survey between the EUC and CostCOM study arms. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To describe CostCOM (Arm B) patients and their provider experience with various implementation outcomes. II. To assess accuracy of out-of-pocket estimates communicated with the CostCOM (Arm B) patients at part of the intervention with their reported actual out-of-pocket cost. III. To compare neighborhood characteristics of patient participants versus (vs.) practice patient population. IV. To assess patients' satisfaction with CostCOM in patients with Arm B. V. To assess patients' receipt of financial navigation via internal practice or external resources. VI. To evaluate longitudinal changes in cost-related cancer care non-adherence, material hardship, financial worry, quality of life and satisfaction with care. OUTLINE: Non-patient participants: Participants complete surveys and participant in 1 on 1 in depth semi-structured interview over 20-30 minutes at 15-39 months after first patient enrollment. Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM A: Patients receive Patient Advocate Foundation (PAF) brochure describing financial navigation services. ARM B: Patients receive usual financial care per practice standard of care and CostCOM financial counseling sessions over 1 hour within 30 days after enrollment and at 3, 6 and 12 months. Patients are followed up within 12 months of study intervention completion.
Phase
N/ASpan
196 weeksSponsor
ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research GroupNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Healthy Volunteers
Mobile Health for Adherence in Breast Cancer Patients
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To compare CDK4/6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i) adherence at 12 months after completion of the baseline survey captured using electronic monitoring between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare CDK4/6i adherence at 12 months after completion of the baseline survey captured through self-report between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. II. To compare CDK4/6i persistence at 12 months after completion of the baseline survey captured using electronic monitoring between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. III. To compare symptom burden at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. IV. To compare quality of life at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. V. To compare patient-provider communication at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. VI. To compare self-efficacy for managing symptoms at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. VII. To compare financial worry at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To assess longitudinal changes of patient-reported outcomes (self reported adherence, symptom burden, quality of life, and financial worry) from the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. II. To compare healthcare utilization at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. III. To compare progression-free survival at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. IV. To compare overall survival at 12 months between the EUC (Arm A) and CONCURxP (Arm B) arms. V. To describe CONCURxP (Arm B) patients and their provider experience with various implementation outcomes. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized into 1 of 2 arms. Non-patient participants are assigned to arm C. ARM A: Patients use the WiseBag medication dispenser and receive access to educational materials every 4 weeks over 12 months. ARM B: Patients use the WiseBag medication dispenser and receive personalized text message reminders, medication tracking and healthcare provider follow ups as part of the CONCURxP platform over 12 months. Patients may complete an interview over 20-30 minutes within 6 months of study completion. ARM C: Participants complete an interview over 20-30 minutes 15-39 months post-first patient enrollment. After completion of study intervention, patients may be followed up to 6 months.
Phase
N/ASpan
184 weeksSponsor
ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research GroupNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Healthy Volunteers
The PLATINUM Trial: Optimizing Chemotherapy for the Second-Line Treatment of Metastatic BRCA1/2 or PALB2-Associated Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate and compare overall response rate (ORR) in patients with BRCA1/2 or PALB2 mutant pancreas cancer whose disease has progressed on front-line fluorouracil, irinotecan, leucovorin and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) treated with nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin (NABPLAGEM) = nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin (arm 1) versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (arm 2). (Phase II) II. To evaluate and compare overall survival (OS) time in patients with BRCA1/2 or PALB2 mutant whose disease has progressed on front-line FOLFIRINOX treated with 1) NABPLAGEM = nab-paclitaxel, gemcitabine, and cisplatin (arm 1) versus nab-paclitaxel and gemcitabine (arm 2). (Phase III) SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To evaluate and compare progression-free survival (PFS) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1 (RECIST 1.1) criteria between 2 treatment arms. II. To evaluate and compare duration of response (DoR) between 2 treatment arms. III. To evaluate and compare CA19-9 response (defined as patients with a baseline CA19-9 >= 2x upper limit of normal (ULN) who demonstrate a minimum 25% decrease in CA19-9 at any time point) between 2 treatment arms. IV. To evaluate and compare toxicity profile as assessed by treating clinicians between 2 treatment arms. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients receive nab-paclitaxel intravenously (IV) over 30-40 minutes, gemcitabine IV over 30-40 minutes, and cisplatin IV over 30-60 minutes on days 1 and 15 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) throughout the trial. Patients may optionally undergo blood sample collection at baseline and on study. ARM II: Patients receive nab-paclitaxel IV over 30-40 minutes and gemcitabine IV over 30-40 minutes on days 1 and 15 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients also undergo MRI or CT throughout the trial. Patients may optionally undergo blood sample collection at baseline and on study. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up within 30 days and then every 3 months for 2 years or until death, whichever comes first.
Phase
2/3Span
278 weeksSponsor
Alliance for Clinical Trials in OncologyNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Cognitive Training for Cancer Related Cognitive Impairment in Breast Cancer Survivors
The goal of this trial is to determine the efficacy of advanced cognitive training for cancer survivors suffering from cancer- and cancer-treatment-related cognitive dysfunction. For millions of cancer survivors, cognitive dysfunction is a prevalent, severe, and persistent problem that has long been associated with poor work-related and health-related outcomes. Evidence suggests that a significant subset of breast cancer survivors (BCS) incur cognitive changes that may persist for years after treatment. Unfortunately, the scientific basis for managing these cognitive changes is extremely limited. Available evidence from pilot studies, including our work, suggests that advanced cognitive training, which is based on the principles of neuroplasticity (ability of brain neurons to re-organize and form new neural networks), may be a viable treatment option. However, previous trials to date have been limited by lack of attention-controlled designs, small samples of BCS, or limited outcome measures. Therefore, to overcome limitations of past studies and build on our pilot results, the purpose of this 2-group, double-blind, randomized controlled trial is to conduct a full-scale efficacy trial to compare advanced cognitive training to attention control in BCS.
Phase
N/ASpan
190 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Studying the Effect of Levocarnitine in Protecting the Liver From Chemotherapy for Leukemia or Lymphoma
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To determine in a randomized manner whether the addition of levocarnitine prophylaxis to asparaginase-containing regimens will decrease the incidence of conjugated hyperbilirubinemia (> 3 mg/dL) during ALL induction therapy for adolescents and young adults (adolescents and young adults [AYAs], age 15-39 years). SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To examine the impact of levocarnitine prophylaxis on differences in the incidence of grade >= 3 alanine aminotransferase (ALT) or aspartate aminotransferase (AST) elevations during ALL Induction. II. To compare rates of minimal residual disease (MRD) positivity at end of Induction and describe MRD+ by end of consolidation (EOC) in those receiving ALL induction chemotherapy with and without levocarnitine. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare rates of toxicity and associated dose reductions for chemotherapy administered with and without concomitant levocarnitine supplementation. II. To compare across study arms the peak levels during Induction of conjugated and total bilirubin, AST, ALT, and duration of conjugated hyperbilirubinemia from onset > 3 mg/dL to =< 3 mg/dL. III. To describe the efficacy of levocarnitine prophylaxis to reduce the incidence and/or severity of early patient-reported chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy. IV. To describe the three-year event-free and overall survival (EFS/OS) in those treated with and without levocarnitine prophylaxis. V. To examine the association of age with asparaginase activity and asparaginase-associated hepatotoxicity during induction. VI. To examine the association of body-mass-index (BMI) percentile (or absolute BMI for young adults) with asparaginase activity and asparaginase-associated hepatotoxicity during induction. VII. To describe adherence by self-report and pill-count to oral levocarnitine in patients randomized to the intervention arm. VIII. To examine the association of plasma levels of carnitine and related markers with the efficacy of levocarnitine supplementation. IX. To determine the impact of inherited genetic variation on hepatoxicity and levocarnitine efficacy. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms (arm A vs. B). ARM A: Patients receive levocarnitine orally (PO) or intravenously (IV) as a bolus over 2 to 3 minutes or by infusion (over 10 to 30 minutes or per institutional standard) starting prior to standard of care induction chemotherapy with pegaspargase or calaspargase pegol and continued through the earlier of the last day of Induction phase (i.e., day prior to start of next phase) or Induction day 35. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection during screening and on study. ARM B: Patients receive standard of care induction chemotherapy with pegaspargase or calaspargase pegol on study. Patients may also undergo blood sample collection during screening and on study. ARM C (RESCUE): Patients in Arms A and B who develop conjugated hyperbilirubinemia > 3 mg/dL during induction may receive levocarnitine rescue PO or IV as a bolus dose over 2 to 3 minutes or by infusion (over 10 to 30 minutes or per institutional standard) until resolution of conjugated hyperbilirubinemia =< 3 mg/dL (or start of consolidation or the next treatment phase, whichever occurs first).
Phase
3Span
280 weeksSponsor
Children's Oncology GroupNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Comparing Combinations of Drugs to Treat Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma (NDMM) When a Stem Cell Transplant is Not a Medically Suitable Treatment
PRIMARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare progression-free survival (PFS) in frail or selected intermediate fit newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) participants treated with bortezomib with lenalidomide and dexamethasone at reduced dosing (VRd-Lite) induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (Arm 1) versus daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj with lenalidomide and dexamethasone (DRd) induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (Arm 2). II. To compare overall survival (OS) in frail or selected intermediate fit NDMM participants treated with VRd-Lite induction followed by lenalidomide maintenance (Arm 1) versus DRd induction followed by lenalidomide and daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj maintenance (Arm 3). SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare PFS in Arm 1 versus Arm 3 II. To compare OS in Arm 1 versus Arm 2. III. To compare PFS in Arm 2 versus 3. IV. To compare the overall response rate (ORR) of Arm 1 against the ORR of Arm 2 and Arm 3. V. To compare the safety of Arm 1 with the safety of Arm 2 and Arm 3. VI. To explore veinous thrombo-embolism (VTE) incidence in participants receiving lenalidomide during induction across the three study arms. VII. To describe median time to response (complete response [CR] or better per International Myeloma Working Group [IMWG] criteria, very good partial response [VGPR] or better per IMWG criteria, partial response [PR] or better per IMWG criteria) on the three study arms. PRIMARY QUALITY OF LIFE (QOL) OBJECTIVE: I. To compare patient-reported global health status between treatment arms (Arm 1 versus the combination of Arms 2 and 3) at 9 months after randomization (end of induction therapy) using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Core Quality of Life Questionnaire (QLQ-C30). SECONDARY QOL OBJECTIVE: II. To compare longitudinal changes in global health status between treatment arms (Arm 1 versus the combination of Arms 2 and 3) from baseline to 9 months after randomization (end of induction therapy). PATIENT REPORTED OUTCOMES-COMMON TERMINOLOGY CRITERIA FOR ADVERSE EVENTS (PRO-CTCAE) OBJECTIVE: I. To compare selected patient-reported outcome symptoms using PRO-CTCAE items among the 3 study arms. ADDITIONAL OBJECTIVES: I. To compare the rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) by clonoSEQ after 9 cycles of induction in Arm 1 versus Arm 2 and Arm 3, respectively. II. To compare the rate of MRD conversion after 1 year of maintenance in participants who were MRD positive after induction in Arm 1 versus Arm 2 and Arm 3, respectively. III. To compare the rate of sustained MRD negativity at time points of post-induction, post-1 year maintenance in Arm 1 versus Arm 2 and Arm 3, respectively. BANKING OBJECTIVES: I. To bank specimens for future correlative studies. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 3 arms. ARM I (VRd-Lite): INDUCTION CYCLES 1-9: Patients receive bortezomib subcutaneously (SC) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle, lenalidomide orally (PO) on days 1-21 of each cycle, and dexamethasone PO on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 9 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. MAINTENANCE CYCLES 10+: Patients receive lenalidomide PO on days 1-21 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM II (DRd-R): INDUCTION CYCLES 1-9: Patients receive daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj SC on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycles 1-2, days 1 and 15 of cycles 3-6, and day 1 of cycles 7-9, lenalidomide PO on days 1-21 of each cycle, and dexamethasone PO on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 9 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. MAINTENANCE CYCLES 10+: Patients receive lenalidomide PO on days 1-21 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. ARM III (DRd-DR): INDUCTION CYCLES 1-9: Patients receive daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj SC on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of cycles 1-2, days 1 and 15 of cycles 3-6, and day 1 of cycles 7-9, lenalidomide PO on days 1-21 of each cycle, and dexamethasone PO on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. Treatment repeats every 28 days for up to 9 cycles in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. MAINTENANCE CYCLES 10+: Patients receive daratumumab and hyaluronidase-fihj SC on day 1 of each cycle and lenalidomide PO on days 1-21 of each cycle. Cycles repeat every 28 days in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. After completion of study treatment, patients are followed up every 3 months for 1 year, every 6 months for 2 years, and then annually for up to 10 years.
Phase
3Span
340 weeksSponsor
SWOG Cancer Research NetworkNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Testing Shorter Duration Radiation Therapy Versus the Usual Radiation Therapy in Patients With High Risk Prostate Cancer
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To compare metastasis-free survival, determined using conventional imaging, between men with high-risk prostate cancer randomized to ultrahypofractionation (stereotactic body radiation therapy [SBRT]) to those randomized to moderate hypofractionation and conventional fractionation. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare physician-reported toxicity as measured by Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version (v)5 between treatment arms. II. To determine if ultrahypofractionation is non-inferior to moderate hypofractionation and conventional fractionation with respect to patient-reported urinary function (assessed by Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite [EPIC]-26 urinary domains). III. To determine if ultrahypofractionation is non-inferior to moderate hypofractionation and conventional fractionation with respect to patient-reported bowel function (assessed by EPIC-26 bowel domain). IV. To compare patient-reported fatigue (assessed by Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System [PROMIS]-Fatigue) between treatment arms. V. To compare patient-reported treatment burden (assessed by COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity [COST]) between treatment arms. VI. To compare failure-free survival between treatment arms. VII. To compare metastasis-free survival based on molecular imaging between treatment arms. VIII. To compare overall survival between treatment arms. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVES: I. To compare patient-reported sexual function (assessed by EPIC-26 sexual domain) between treatment arms. II. To compare patient-reported quality of life (assessed by European Quality of Life Five Dimension Five Level Scale Questionnaire [EQ-5D-5L]) between treatment arms. OUTLINE: Patients are randomized to 1 of 2 arms. ARM I: Patients undergo SBRT for a total of 5 treatments over 2 weeks. Patients also undergo computed tomography (CT) and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on study. ARM II: Patients undergo external beam radiation treatment (EBRT) for 20-45 treatments over 4 to 9 weeks. Patients also undergo CT and/or MRI on study. Patients are followed up every 6 months for 5 years.
Phase
3Span
642 weeksSponsor
NRG OncologyNiles, Michigan
Recruiting
Evaluating the Impact of Social and Genetic Factors on Outcomes in Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Survivors
PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: I. To establish the association of social-environmental risk factors on both disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. SECONDARY OBJECTIVES: I. To establish the associations of individual resilience factors on DFS and OS for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. II. To establish the associations of social-environmental risk factors and individual resilience factors on quality of life (QOL) for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. III. To quantify the extent to which alterations in human gene expression could potentially mediate the effects of social-environmental risk factors and individual resilience factors on DFS, and OS for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. EXPLORATORY OBJECTIVE: I. To determine whether the relationship between social-environmental risk factors or individual resilience factors and distal outcomes may be moderated by race/ethnicity, sex and gender identity, and geography for adolescent and young adult cancer survivors. OUTLINE: This is an observational study. Participants complete questionnaires about health-related quality of life and undergo collection of blood samples at baseline and 6, 12, 18, and 24 months.
Phase
N/ASpan
329 weeksSponsor
ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research GroupNiles, Michigan
Recruiting