Active clinical trials for "Carcinoma, Hepatocellular"

This is a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, multicenter phase III registration clinical study to observe, compare and evaluate the efficacy and safety of Toripalimab combined with Lenvatinib versus placebo combined with Lenvatinib as the 1st-line therapy for advanced HCC. Eligible subjects will be randomized at a ratio of 2:1 to receive Toripalimab combined with Lenvatinib (experimental group) or Placebo combined with Lenvatinib (control group).

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of lenvatinib and pembrolizumab in combination with TACE versus TACE plus oral and intravenous (IV) placebos in participants with incurable, non-metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The primary hypotheses are that pembrolizumab plus lenvatinib in combination with TACE is superior to placebo plus TACE with respect to progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

This is a Phase 2, randomized, multicenter, open-label, 2-arm study to investigate the efficacy and safety of ociperlimab in combination with tislelizumab plus BAT1706, and tislelizumab plus BAT1706, as first-line treatment in participants with advanced HCC.

This is a Phase IIIb, one arm, multicenter, open-label study primarily designed to evaluate the safety of atezolizumab + bevacizumab in participants with unresectable or unsuitable for locoregional treatments for metastatic HCC not previously treated with systemic therapy. As part of its secondary objectives, this study is also designed to evaluate the efficacy of atezolizumab and bevacizumab in these participants.

Researchers are looking for a better way to treat people diagnosed with liver cancer which may have spread to nearby tissue and is unlikely to be cured or controlled with treatment (advanced metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma, HCC). Before a treatment can be approved for people to take, researchers do clinical trials to better understand its safety and how it works. In this trial, the researchers will learn more about the trial treatment, regorafenib, in a small number of participants. They will study the results when the trial treatment is taken with another cancer treatment called pembrolizumab. There will be 2 parts to this trial. The part 1 (pilot phase) will include about 52 men and women. The part 2 (expansion phase) will include about 67 men and women. All of the participants will have HCC and will be aged 18 years or older. All of the participants will have tried other treatments that did not help their HCC. These other treatments (PD-1/PD-L1 Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors) are designed to work by stopping the activity of certain proteins in the immune system thought to play a role in HCC. During both parts of the trial, the participants will take regorafenib and receive pembrolizumab. In the pilot phase, there will be 2 groups of participants. The group that each participant joins will be based on the treatment they already received for their HCC. The researchers will review the results in each group to learn if regorafenib and pembrolizumab are helping one group of participants more than others. Outcome of this review will determine the population to be treated in the expansion phase.

This phase II trial studies how well pevonedistat alone or in combination with chemotherapy (paclitaxel and carboplatin) works in treating patients with bile duct cancer of the liver. Pevonedistat may stop the growth of tumor cells by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. Chemotherapy drugs, such as paclitaxel and carboplatin, work in different ways to stop the growth of tumor cells, either by killing the cells, by stopping them from dividing, or by stopping them from spreading. This study may help the study doctors find out how well pevonedistat shrinks bile duct cancer of the liver when given alone and when in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin.

The purpose of this research study is to study the effect of giving nivolumab with CCR2/5-inhibitor or anti-IL-8 before surgery, and after surgery, with the goal of determining if this medicine results in: A significant immune response against their tumor (which the study team will see in the tumor that is taken out at the time of surgery) Improvement in long term survival rates

Regorafenib is an oral tumour deactivation agent that potently blocks multiple protein kinases, including kinases involved in tumour angiogenesis (VEGFR1, -2, -3, TIE2), oncogenesis (KIT, RET, RAF-1, BRAF, BRAFV600E), metastasis (VEGFR3, PDGFR, FGFR) and tumour immunity (CSF1R). In particular, regorafenib inhibits mutated KIT, a major oncogenic driver in gastrointestinal stromal tumours, and thereby blocks tumour cell proliferation. Regorafenib has shown in clinical trials an acceptable benefit-risk across different tumor types, including colorectal cancer (CRC), GastroIntestinal Stromal Tumors (GIST) and HCC. The most frequently observed adverse drug reactions (≥30%) in patients receiving regorafenib are pain, hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), asthenia/fatigue, diarrhea, decreased appetite and food intake, hypertension, and infection. Nivolumab is a human immunoglobulin G4 (IgG4) monoclonal antibody to the programmed death (PD)-1 receptor, blocking the interaction with PD-ligand (PD-L)1/PD-L213 and restoring T-cell-mediated antitumor activity. Nivolumab was evaluated in second-line the CheckMate 040 Study (Escalation and Expansion cohort. In both cohorts of the CheckMate 040 Study, the safety profile was acceptable and there were no reported nivolumab-related deaths. In the dose-expansion cohorts from the Phase 1/2 CheckMate 040 Study, 65% of patients had treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) of any grade 18% with Grade 3 or 4 TRAEs with fatigue, pruritus, and rash being the most common. Elevation of aspartate transaminase (AST) and alanine transaminase (ALT) were the most frequent Grade 3-4 TRAEs. AST/ALT elevations, however, were generally asymptomatic and readily managed. For this reason, the rationale of this Phase I/IIa trial is to optimize the action of regorafenib and nivolumab but bearing in mind the potential impact of the drug-interaction and enhancement of the severity and/or frequency of adverse events. Thus, regorafenib will be administered as monotherapy during the first 2 cycles (each cycle is 3 weeks on plus 1 week off) of treatment to enhance T cell trafficking and infiltration into the tumor bed to increase the benefits of anti-PD-PD-L1, specific stimuli while emitting Damage-associated molecular patterns (DAMPs), followed by regorafenib plus nivolumab to impact step 7 of the cancer immunity cycle described by Chen. The anti-PD-L1 effect under hypoxia was evaluated by Noman et al in a tumor model and they postulated that the abrogated myeloid-derived suppressor cells (MDSC)-mediated T cell suppression is achieved in part by modulating the cytokine production (IL-6 and IL-10). Specifically, hypoxia could promote immunosuppression by reducing the cytotoxic efficacy of immune cells, by increasing the peri-tumoral immunosuppressive cell populations infiltration of and priming the expression of immunosuppressive cytokines. Current options for first line are sorafenib and atezolizumab-bevacizumab. Lenvatinib has been shown to be non-inferior to sorafenib, but it is less frequently used and its toxicity profile mandates a stringent selection of patients. Sorafenib shares some molecular targets with regorafenib, but this has specific action against VEGFR-2, VEGFR-3, Tie-2, PDGFR, FGFR-1, c-Kit, RET and p38-alpha7. Both are antiangiogenic as bevacizumab, but while bevacizumab is limited to the VEGF pathway, they act on several additional target involved in cancer progression. Atezolizumab and nivolumab target the PD1 checkpoint but acting at different levels: PD-1 receptor for Nivolumab and PD-L1 for Atezolizumab. This implies a difference and if resistance to one of the antibodies emerges during treatment, the use of the other one may overcome such key event leading to treatment failure. Recently, the combination of tremelimumab and durvalumab improved OS in comparison to sorafenib; in addition, durvalumab monotherapy was not inferior to sorafenib. The aim of this study is to do a sequential treatment combining regorafenib, second- line treatment in hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) with anti PD-1 to enhance the outcome of patients based on the synergy between both drugs.

Background: Liver cancer is the sixth most common cancer worldwide. Diagnosing liver cancer usually requires a liver sample. Getting the best sample helps determine whether cancer is present and what kind of cancer it is. But sampling can be difficult. This study will look at combining two devices to provide better liver samples. Objective: To see if combining fusion imaging and optical imaging can better sample areas of concern in the liver and determine the presence of disease. Eligibility: People ages 18 and older who need a liver biopsy as part of diagnosis or treatment. Design: Participants will be screened with: Review of imaging Medical history Physical exam Blood test results Participants will have a dye injected into a vein 24 hours before their biopsy. They will be monitored for 30 minutes for any side effects. For the biopsy, participants skin will be numbed. They may have stickers placed on their belly to help guide the needle. They will have a CT scan to plan the needle s pathway. For the scan, they will lie in a machine that takes pictures of the body. A small camera will be placed near the needle to take pictures of the liver. A medical GPS tracking system will be used. This will guide the needle into the area of the participant s liver where the biopsy will be taken. After the biopsy, participants will recover in the hospital for 4 6 hours. After the procedure, researchers will take the participants biopsy tissue and look at it to try to compare new ways to picture the sample.

This trial aims to improve hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) tumor responses in patients undergoing Y90 radioembolization by using personalized dosimetry as part of treatment planning. Using standard calculations for Y90 doses may not be specific enough for individual patients given that there can be differences in how tumor cells and liver cells respond to radiation. Personalized dose plans may help improve treatment and outcomes in liver cancer.