Active clinical trials for "Leukemia, Myeloid"

Allo - hematopoietic stem cell transplantation is currently the only way to cure myelodysplastic syndrome /acute leukemia . The existing experimental results showed that decitabine and 5-azacytidine up-regulated the expression of tumor Ags on leukemic blasts in vitro and expanded the numbers of immunomodulatory T regulatory cells in animal models. Reasoning that decitabine might selectively augment a graft versus leukemia effect, the investigators used decitabine administration after allogeneic stem cell transplantation to studied the immunologic sequelae.

Background: Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (or allotransplant; donor blood stem cells) have been used with varying degrees of success as an immune therapy for blood-system cancers (leukemias, myelodysplastic syndrome, lymphomas, multiple myeloma, etc.). Some people s cancer remains active (comes back or continues to spread) after an allotransplant, while other peoples cancer disappears and they are hopefully cured. National Institutes of Health (NIH) researchers are studying the reasons for these different treatment outcomes, and trying to develop better cancer treatments for people with active cancer after allotransplant. Researchers are collecting data from people who have had allotransplants for a cancer of the blood, whether or not the cancer is in remission, and from their donors. Those with active cancers may be eligible to participate in one of several NIH studies testing treatments for active cancer after allotransplant. Objectives: To develop a systematic, comprehensive evaluation of individuals with relapsed malignant blood cancers after allotransplant (and, if available, their donors) to identify potential treatment study options To compare the immune system after allotransplant between people whose cancers are growing with people whose cancers remain in remission. To compare the immune system after cancer relapse/progression treatment between people whose cancer responds to treatment with those whose cancers continue to grow. Eligibility: Individuals whose blood system cancer grows or comes back after receiving allotransplant treatment. Individuals whose blood system cancer is responding or in remission 100 days or more after receiving allotransplant treatment. Related stem-cell donors of eligible allotransplant recipients. Design: Participants will be evaluated with a full physical examination, detailed medical history (for recipients, including a history of allotransplant treatment process, side-effects, etc.), and blood tests. Recipients will also have imaging studies, possible tissue biopsies, quality of life questionnaires/assessments, and other tests to evaluate the current state of their cancer, whether active or in remission. In some cases, it may be possible to substitute results from recent tests and/or biopsies. Healthy related donors will have apheresis to provide white blood cells for study and/or for use in potential treatment options. If stem cells would be medically helpful to a recipient, their donors might be asked to take injections of filgrastim before the apheresis procedure to stimulate the production of stem cells for collection. As feasible, all recipients will be asked to return to the NIH for detailed follow-up visits in conjunction with 6, 12, and 24 months post-allotransplant evaluations, and may be monitored between visits. Recipients whose cancers are active and who are found to be eligible for treatment protocols at the NIH will continue to be monitored on this study while participating on treatment protocols. Return visits and follow-up tests for this study will be coordinated with those required by the treatment protocol. Participants may return in the future to be evaluated for new treatment study options (recipients) or additional cell donations for therapy (donors).

Dendritic cells vaccinations are increasingly used in order to develop antitumoral immune response. This will be a Phase 2 trial using autologous dendritic cells pulsed with leukemic apoptotic corpse in acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) patients in first or second Complete remission (CR).

Cord blood transplantation (CBT) is an alternative option for patients with pediatric acute leukemia that indicated stem cell transplantation. Although CBT is as affective as unrelated bone marrow transplantation with lower graft versus host disease (GVHD) severity and incidence, transplantation related mortality (TRM) has been major problems after myeloablative conditioning. To reduce TRM, CBT with non-myeloablative conditionings have been performed but not so satisfactory especially for engraftment rate. Recently reduced toxicity myeloablative conditioning regimen was developed with promising result in adult bone marrow or mobilized peripheral blood transplantation. To increase the engraftment potential with low TRM rate, reduced toxicity myeloablative conditioning composed of fludarabine, intravenous busulfan plus thymoglobulin is planned for pediatric patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

The purpose of this study is to compare the effects, good and/or bad, of a standard chemotherapy regimen for AML that includes the drugs daunorubicin and cytarabine combined with or without midostaurin (also known as PKC412), to find out which is better. This research is being done because it is unknown whether the addition of midostaurin to chemotherapy treatment is better than chemotherapy treatment alone. Midostaurin has been tested in over 400 patients and is being studied in a number of illnesses, including AML, colon cancer, and lung cancer. Midostaurin blocks an enzyme, produced by a gene known as FLT3, that may have a role in the survival and growth of AML cells. Not all leukemia cells will have the abnormal FLT3 gene. This study will focus only on patients with leukemia cells with the abnormal FLT3 gene.

Amonafide is a DNA intercalating agent and inhibitor of topoisomerase II that has been extensively studied in patients with malignant solid tumors. Amonafide has also been studied in patients with AML. The purpose of this study is to assess the relative efficacy and safety of amonafide in combination with cytarabine compared to daunorubicin with cytarabine in subjects with documented secondary AML.

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety and tolerability of an 'AML Cell Vaccine' in patients with poor prognosis acute myeloid leukaemia (AML).

Advances in the biological characterization of AML can now make a proper estimate of the risk of recurrence and likelihood of survival of different groups of patients according to the expression of different disease parameters. Karyotype, the molecular alterations affecting genes FLT3, NPM1 and CEBPA, minimal residual disease by flow cytometry and response to first induction cycle are variables that must be taken into consideration when planning the treatment of first line from a patient with AML. This breakthrough in the field of biology has not resulted yet in the development of new drugs really effective in the treatment of AML. Therefore, the core of the treatment continue to rely on the use of traditional chemotherapy combined or not with allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell. Both treatments differ in their antileukemic efficacy, higher in aloTPH, as well as their toxicity and procedure-related mortality, increased also in the aloTPH. These aspects should be added that most candidates aloTPH patients lack an HLA identical sibling donor forcing the search for alternative sources and hematopoietic stem cell donors. These transplants alternative, but are not committed to their antileukemic efficacy, it does have implied a greater toxicity. Therefore, the ultimate effectiveness of these procedures depends largely on the proper selection of candidates for the same. While there is broad agreement in terms of induction chemotherapy using a combination of cytarabine with anthracycline, the choice of chemotherapy regimen is controversial postremisión today. In the poor prognosis of itself involve the LMA, patients classified as "favorable group" are acceptable disease-free survival with consolidation schemes involving high-dose cytarabine. For other patients appear to be inappropriate to combine cytarabine with an anthracycline, at least one cycle of consolidation, and raise the option of allogeneic different depending on prognostic markers

This protocol is part of the German AML Intergroup Trial, where the OSHO study arm is compared to the common German standard arm after randomization in a 9:1 ratio. The hypothesis involves primarily dosing and application of AraC for induction. It is expected that CR rates and as a consequence also LFS are higher in protocols using higher AraC compared to lower doses and that LFS might be superior in the study specific arm compared to the golden standard published several years ago. In the standard arm, AraC 100mg/m2/day is given as continuous infusion over 7 days. Daunorubicin is given as 60 mg/m2/day over a two hours infusion on days 3, 4 und 5. On day 22 a second induction course is applied. After reaching CR, three cycles of AraC 3 g/m2 over three hours bid are infused on day 1, 3 und 5. In contrast the OSHO arm consists of induction therapy with IDA 12 mg/m*2 over 20-30-min-iv on day 1 - 3 and AraC 2 x 1 g/m*2 bid over 3-h-iv on days 1+3+5+7. A previous phase II study of the OSHO has shown high CR in patients with relapsed AML using MitoFlag. In this study we asked the question if MitoFlag is superior to IdaAraC in newly diagnosed AML patients without CR after the first induction chemotherapy. Therefore patients are randomized to receive either MitoFlag or IdaAraC and the difference in CR rates evaluated. It is still unclear if two consolidation therapies are needed before allogeneic or autologous stem cell transplantation. This question is being addressed in the second part of the OSHO study, where patients are randomized to receive either one or two consolidation therapies. In this study all patients with AML and an age of 18-60 years except M3 are entered

Study Design: prospective phase II trial with 30 patients in 1 site Treatment Scheme: Option 1: Patient < 60 years of age with relapse after chemotherapy or > 12 months after hematopoetic stem cell transplantation Mylotarg 6 mg/ m² day -21 Mylotarg 3 mg/ m² day -14 Fludarabin 30 mg/ m² day -6 to -3 TBI 2x2 Gy day -3 to -2 (total dose 8 Gy) Tacrolimus (level adapted) from day -3 on Mycophenolat 2 x 1000 mg p.o. from day 0 to day 40 PBSC day 0 Option 2: Patient > 60 years of age or younger patients < 12 Months after hematopoetic stem cell transplantation Mylotarg 6 mg/ m² day -21 Mylotarg 3 mg/ m² day -14 Fludarabin 30 mg/ m² day -3 to -1 TBI 1x2 Gy day 0 (total dose 2 Gy) Tacrolimus (level adapted) from day -3 on Mycophenolat 2 x 1000 mg p.o. from day 0 to 40 PBSC day 0