Active clinical trials for "Melanoma"

The purpose of this study is to confirm the safety and efficacy of Apatinib as the Second-line Therapy in Malignant Melanoma.

This trial aims to assess the immunological and metabolic changes induced by the Fasting Mimicking Diet (FMD) in the pre-operative and post-operative setting in breast cancer and melanoma patients. Three cohorts of patients will be enrolled: 1) Cohort A: patients with resectable breast cancer (cT1N0M0 stage or cT1cN1M0-cT2cN0M0 stages not requiring pre-operative systemic treatment at the judgment of the investigator) who are candidate to curative surgery; 2) Cohort B: patients with malignant melanoma patients candidate to dissection of the lymph node basin because of a positive sentinel lymph node (stage IIIA-IIIB-IIIC); 3) Cohort C: patients with resected malignant melanoma (including radicalization and, in case, lymph node dissection) who are not candidate to any adjuvant treatment, but only to clinical and radiological follow-up (stage IIB-IIC). Patients in cohorts A and B will undergo one 5-days FMD cycle about 13-15 days before surgical removal of primary tumor (breast) or lymph nodes (breast, melanoma). Patients in cohort C will undergo 4 consecutive FMD cycles every 28 days, starting one month after surgery.

The purpose of this clinical study is to evaluate if the DermaSense prototype EIS scanner can provide medical decision support which can complement dermoscopy-based identification of the disease at time of biopsy decision.

To evaluate the objective response rate of camrelizumab combined with anlotinib and nab-paclitaxel in patients with untreated advanced mucosal melanoma.

Rationale: The combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab induces relatively high response rates and promising response depth in late stage melanoma. Nevertheless, it takes time till responses occur and still a significant number of patients do not benefit from treatment, due to rapid progressive disease or resistance to therapy. In contrast to immunotherapies targeted therapies (BRAF or MEK inhibitors), can induce faster and higher response rates, but often of shorter duration, even when combined. Initial attempts of combining vemurafenib or dabrafenib + trametinib with ipilimumab failed due to toxicity. Patients with elevated levels of serum LDH are less likely to respond to immunotherapy compared to patients with normal LDH levels. This does not mean that such patients do not benefit at all from immunotherapy. This raises the question, whether response rates upon immunotherapy can be improved by upfront reduction of tumor burden and normalization of LDH. The investigators postulate that induction therapy with combined BRAF+MEK inhibition, and subsequent LDH normalization, can improve response rates to the rates seen in LDH normal patients. To address this question the investigators have setup a randomized phase 2 trial in metastatic melanoma patients with elevated serum LDH comparing the response rates upon ipilimumab + nivolumab versus ipilimumab + nivolumab preceded by 6 weeks of vemurafenib + cobimetinib induction. Furthermore, less than half of the patients treated with the combination of ipilimumab and nivolumab received maintenance nivolumab, and approximately 40% of all patients discontinued treatment for toxicity. In 70% of patients responses were ongoing despite discontinuation of treatment due to toxicity. This raises the question, to what extent does maintenance therapy add clinical benefit to an ongoing immune response. Preclinical data indicate even that continuous restimulation of T cells can result in activation induced non-responsiveness (anergy). Therefore, a secondary objective of this trial will be, to test a response-driven nivolumab scheme Objectives: Primary Objective • To compare efficacy of induction vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) versus upfront ipilimumab + nivolumab treatment (Arm B). Secondary Objectives To describe duration of response and overall survival induced by vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) as compared to ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B) To describe the rate and quality of toxicity observed in the two study arms To describe the rate of ongoing responses upon response-driven flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance To determine the immune-activating capacity of induction therapy with vemurafenib + cobimetinib followed by the combination of ipilimumab + nivolumab. To evaluate the changes in systemic immune competence Study design: This is a two-arm phase 2 study consisting of 200 BRAFV600E/K mutation-positive late-stage melanoma patients with an elevated baseline LDH level (> ULN, < 3xULN) randomized 1:1 (stratified according to LDH) to receive either vemurafenib + cobimetinib directly followed by ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm A) or standard first line ipilimumab + nivolumab (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) nivolumab maintenance in a response-driven manner. Study population: Stage IV, or unresectable stage III, BRAFV600E/K mutation positive melanoma patients, naïve for BRAF/MEK, PD-1/PD-L1 or CTLA-4 targeting therapy, 18 years and older. Intervention: Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive either 6 weeks vemurafenib 960 mg bid + cobimetinib 60 mg QD 21-day on, 7-day off (21/7) schedule, directly followed by 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm A) or first line standard 4 courses of ipilimumab 3mg/kg q3wk + nivolumab 1mg/kg q3wk (Arm B). Subsequently, patients in both arms will receive nivolumab maintenance flat dose (240mg q2w or 480mg q4w) in a response-driven manner according to their response at week 18. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary Endpoints • Compare the best overall response rate (BORR) according to RECIST 1.1 of both arms at week 18 from start of treatment. Secondary Endpoints Progression-free survival (PFS) according to RECIST 1.1 Overall survival (OS) Percentage of grade 3/4 toxicities according to CTCv4.03 Percentage of ongoing response, percentage of patients requiring re-induction, response percentage upon re-induction Changes in tumor-specific T cell responses

The proposed study builds upon the success of our research program (STU00017005: Interventions to teach melanoma patients skin self-examination and the continuation STU0201983) designed to increase early detection of melanomas before they metastasize. This study seeks to expand the use of our efficacious skin self-examination (SSE) training program to first-degree relatives with automated support with reminders and the dermatologist coaching about pictures of moles submitted by user. In 2015 there are more than 1 million living melanoma patients in the United States (US), and almost 500,000 were age 40-60 years. If each melanoma patient has 2.79 first-degree relatives (children, and siblings of melanoma patients), then there are 2.79 million first-degree relatives and 1 million melanoma patients or 3.79 million people at-risk to develop melanoma, who are predominantly non-Hispanic White. A first-degree relative (FDR) is the parent, sibling or child of a melanoma patient. In 2015, approximately 73,870 individuals in the US will be diagnosed with invasive melanoma and about 9,940 will die from the disease. People with a history of melanoma have 10 times greater risk of developing a second new melanoma relative to the general population. A first-degree relative of a melanoma patient (parent, child, sibling) has an 8 times greater chance of developing melanoma. Early detection with surgical excision at an early stage when treatment is usually more effective is the only proven curative strategy. Thus, enhanced surveillance for melanoma patients and screening for their first-degree relatives, who have the same skin type (skin that easily sunburns) and melanoma-risk habits (sunny vacations) as the melanoma survivor, has the potential to detect melanomas in the early stages where treatment prognosis is optimal. Indeed, several societies recommend routine screening by a physician for persons with a family history of melanoma.

This project seeks to understand differences in the serum vitamin D levels and immune status in cutaneous malignant melanoma patients with different UV exposure histories in New Mexico.

In this phase I study, the investigators want to vaccine with THERAVAC® (an inactivated toxin coupled to melanoma antigen) some patients with advanced metastatic melanoma disease. The primary objective is to analyze the safety of the inreasing doses of vaccine. The secondary objective is to document whether this vaccine can induce tumor regression in immunized patients.

The Aim is to evaluate safety and efficacy of TACE with doxorubicin-loaded DC beads in melanoma patients with liver metastasis. This is a pilot study with the aim of recruiting 20 patients, this is a feasibility study. the patients profile is patients with stage IV Melanoma with liver metastases.

Multicenter, double-blinding, randomized controlled, phase II clinical trial on combined chemotherapy of Endostar (Recombinant Human Endostatin) for untreated patients with advanced melanoma, To compare the efficacy and safety of Endostar combined with Dacarbazine and monotherapy of Dacarbazine for advanced melanoma