Cancer Paid Clinical Trials in Virginia

The purpose of this study is to determine if exercise preconditioning can mitigate the off target effects of chemotherapy treatment on measures of cardiovascular function, inflammatory responses, and quality of life. Read Less

This is a phase II, open-label, single-arm, multi-center Study conducted in Canada and the United States. Patients with NMIBC CIS (with or without resected papillary disease (Ta, T1)) that are considered Bacillus Calmette-Guerin ("BCG")-Unresponsive or who are intolerant to BCG therapy. BCG-Unresponsive is at least one of the following: At least five of six doses of an initial induction course plus at least two of three doses of maintenance therapy; or, at least five of six doses of an initial induction course plus at least two of six doses of a second induction course. Patients experiencing disease relapse within 12 months after finishing the second course of BCG therapy are considered BCG-Unresponsive. The Study will consist of approximately 100 to 125 patients who will undergo two (2) PDT treatments employing 0.70 mg/cm\^2 of Ruvidar® (TLD-1433) at Day 0 and Day 180. Read Less

This is a Phase 3, open-label, randomized, clinical trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of gedatolisib plus fulvestrant with or without palbociclib for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer following progression on or after CDK4/6 and aromatase inhibitor therapy. Condition or disease: Breast Cancer Intervention/treatment: Drug: Gedatolisib Drug: Palbociclib Drug: Fulvestrant Drug: Alpelisib Phase 3 Read Less

A first-in-human study using BIO-106 as a single agent and in combination with pembrolizumab in advanced cancers. Read Less

Partial nephrectomy (PN) is the standard treatment for localized renal masses and should be preferred in clinical T1 (\<7 cm tumor diameter) renal tumors over radical nephrectomy (RN) whenever technically feasible. Nonetheless, indications, approaches, techniques for PN, and correct reporting of outcomes, are still a matter of great debate within the urology community. Concurrently, case-report series suggested that alternative strategies for the treatment of localized renal tumors (ablation techniques (AT), watchful waiting (WW), active surveillance (AS)) could be feasible with acceptable oncologic outcomes in particular settings of patients with localized renal tumors. In this complex clinical scenario, the role surgeon-related and environmental factors (such as surgical experience, hospital resources, countries' social background and performance of health system) are important to address the best personalized approach in patients with renal tumors. In the light of current evidence, many unsolved questions still remain and many unmet needs must be addressed. In particular, 1) the risk-benefit trade-offs between PN and RN for anatomically complex renal localized tumors; 2) the definition of evidence-based strategies to tailor the management strategy (AT vs WW vs AS vs surgery) in different subset of patients with particular clinical conditions (i.e. old, frail, comorbid patients); and 3) the definition of evidence-based recommendations to adapt surgical approach (open vs laparoscopic vs robotic) and resection techniques to different patient-, tumor-, and surgeon-specific characteristics. To meet the challenges, to overcome the limitations of current kidney cancer literature (such as the retrospective study design, potential risk of biases, and heterogeneous follow-up of most series), and to provide high-quality evidence for future development of effective clinical practice Guidelines, we designed the international REgistry of COnservative or Radical treatment of localized kiDney tumors (i-RECORD) Project. The expected impact of the i-RECORD project is to provide robust evidence on the leading clinical and environmental factors driving selection of the management strategy in patients with kidney cancer, and the differential impact of different management strategies (including AS, WW, AT, PN and RN) on functional, perioperative and oncological outcomes, as well as quality of life assessment, at a mid-long term follow-up (5-10 years). Read Less