Active clinical trials for "Colorectal Neoplasms"

Currently, no adjuvant study with hepatic arterial infusion in the adjuvant setting is opened. Recently, the results of a phase II study (NCT00268463, NSABP-C-09) assessing the potential benefit of systemic oxaliplatin and capecitabine alternating with HAI of FUDR, after resection of CRLM have been reported. The primary end point was 2-year survival. Fifty-five of 76 eligible patients were able to initiate protocol-directed therapy and completed median of six cycles (range, one to six). Three postoperative or treatment-related deaths were reported. Overall, 88% of evaluable patients were alive at 2 years. With a median followup of 4.8 years, a total of 30 patients have had disease recurrence, 11 involving the liver. Median disease-free survival was 32.7 months. In conclusion alternating HAI of FUDR and systemic capecitabine and oxaliplatin met the prespecified end point of higher than 85% survival at 2 years and were clinically tolerable.

This clinical trial studies how well educational intervention works in improving knowledge and screening rates of colorectal cancer. An educational intervention, such as viewing an inflatable colon, PowerPoint presentation, or flip books/flipcharts, may help improve knowledge about colorectal cancer and how often people get checked for colorectal cancers.

To compare 2 different image creation/processing techniques during a standard CT scan in order to "see" problems in the liver and learn which method provides better image quality. The techniques use new artificial intelligence software to decrease image noise, which helps the radiologist to evaluate.

The purpose of the study is to see how measurements of tumor differences vary with slight changes in CT scan parameters. Reproducible radiomic features can be extracted for abdominal tumors, and specifically colorectal liver metastases, imaged with clinical CT scanners even in the setting of variable scan parameters and variable contrast timing. Participants will be consented to undergo an additional CT of their abdomen.

This is a cross-sectional study aimed at identifying factors which best predicts patients at high risk of colorectal cancer or colorectal adenomas and to develop a risk prediction model.

The primary objective is to determine the sensitivity and specificity of two Colorectal Cancer (CRC) screening methods, including stool DNA test and blood mRNA test, for colorectal cancer in Chinese population, with colonoscopy as reference method. Lesions will be confirmed as malignant or precancerous by colonoscopy and histopathologic examination. The secondary objective is to compare the performance of these two CRC screening methods to a commercially available FIT assay, both with respect to cancer and advanced adenoma. Lesions will be confirmed as malignant or precancerous by colonoscopy and histopathologic examination.

Recruit of healthy, precancer and colorectal cancer patients and record necessary information of demographic and also other messages. All the volunteers were asked to provide samples including stool, blood, urine and tissues. This protocol is performed with the permission of the ethics committee and all the participants were provided with informed consent.

This study investigates the facilitators and barriers to colorectal cancer screening in underserved populations with a focus on African American, Latinx, and Asian (Chinese) in the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center catchment area. Learning what encourages people and what keeps people from getting colorectal cancer screening may help researchers develop an educational tool for colorectal cancer screening that addresses colorectal cancer knowledge, beliefs, and cultural factors in underserved populations.

The aim of this study is to determine accuracy and predictive values for colorectal cancer of a faecal quantitative immunochemical test (FIT) in unselected symptomatic patients presenting in primary care. Main reference test will be linkage to a nationwide colorectal cancer registry.

Colorectal cancer (CRC) is the third most common cancer in the world with a high postoperative mortality (2 - 6%) as well as a low 5-year survival (40%). Despite advances in surgery and the use of minimally invasive laparoscopic surgery in recent years and adjuvant chemotherapy after surgery, long-term prognosis has only improved marginally. Epidural analgesia is commonly used as a part of the perioperative management of patients undergoing open, colorectal cancer surgery. Not only does it reduce pain and stress, epidurals have been shown to reduce perioperative inflammation and preserve immunological function, all of which may be beneficial in perioperative tumorigenesis. In several retrospective studies, anesthesia and choice of analgesia have shown to improve long-term survival, but no randomized studies have been published in the literature today. Similarly, the benefits of propofol anesthesia in comparison to inhalational anesthesia have recently been high-lighted in relation to cancer surgery, and many patients today request the use of epidurals, total intravenous anesthesia and loco-regional anesthetic technique during surgery, without clear evidence from prospective studies in the literature. Therefore, the question as to the real benefit of anesthesia technique in postoperative outcomes and tumor recurrence remain unanswered, and skepticism abounds amongst both surgeons and anesthesiologists. It is therefore important to study short- and long-term outcomes in patients undergoing CRC surgery, comparing epidural vs. no epidural or inhalational vs. total intravenous anesthesia. However, prospective, randomized studies are costly, require many patients, and the benefits of choice of anesthesia and analgesia on outcome remain uncertain from the current literature. There is a clear diffusion in practice across the world in the choice of anesthesia for patients undergoing CRC surgery, a lack of evidence in the literature and an absence of guidelines on best practice anesthesia care. We believe that by performing a large, prospective, observational, international, pragmatic study, with low costs, it will be possible to answer some of the important questions pertaining to the choice of anesthesia and analgesia. The clinical trials network at the European Society of Anesthesiology will play an important role in the success of this study.