Active clinical trials for "Esophageal Neoplasms"

This study is to explore the clinical efficacy of continuous Endostar infusion combined with radiotherapy in esophageal cancer patients.

RATIONALE: Chemoprevention is the use of certain drugs to keep cancer from forming. Erlotinib may keep esophageal cancer from forming in patients with Barrett esophagus by blocking some of the enzymes needed for cell growth. PURPOSE: This phase II trial is studying how well erlotinib works in treating patients with Barrett esophagus.

The purpose of this study is to determine which regimen is better for esophageal squamous carcinoma in concurrent chemoradiation(CCRT),paclitaxel or S1 plus cisplatin.

The therapy of photofrin PDT was effective in improving life quality of patients with advanced esophageal and/or gastric cardiac cancer and the time optimizing for employing laser irradiation was of great importance.The purpose of this study is to evaluate the clinical efficacy and adverse effects of Photodynamic Therapy (PDT) on esophageal and/or gastric cardiac cancer during different time after inject photofrin.

A two-arm (two cycles' versus four cycles' capecitabine combined oxaliplatin concurrent radiotherapy) randomised Phase III clinical trial was started in Oct. 2015. Definitive chemoradiotherapy is the standard regimen in Western countries for patients with esophageal cancer who can't receive surgery or reject surgery. But in China because of its severer toxic reaction, most of patients had to discontinue treatment at the halfway way. Thus, the chemotherapy regimen of capecitabine combined oxaliplatin are widely used in clinical due to its characristic of low toxic reaction. The purpose of this study is to confirm the efficacy and safety of the different cycles(two cycles and four cycles ) of Capecitabine-oxaliplatin in Chinese esophageal squamous carcinoma radical concurrent chemoradiotherapy. A total of 60 patients will be accrued from China within 2 years. The primary endpoint is overall survival and the secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, response rate, pathologic complete response rate and adverse events.

The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy and safety of apatinib in Metastatic Esophageal Cancer.

Esophageal cancer is a highly aggressive malignancy with a poor overall outcome. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the progression free survival and safety of irinotecan plus S1 versus S1 alone in the patients with previously treated advanced esophageal cancer

The objective of the study is comparison of the efficacy and safety of palliative therapy with single-dose brachytherapy or selfexpanding metal stents (SEMS) in malignant dysphagia resulting from adenocarcinoma of the esophago-gastric junction.

Esophagectomy for esophageal cancer is a technically complex procedure which is associated with high perioperative mortality, even in high volume centers[1]. To facilitate the postoperative recovery of esophagectomies patients by reducing surgical trauma, an increasing number of surgeons have attempted minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) to treat patients with esophageal cancer.[2-10] However, there is no consensus regarding the optimal method for performing an esophagectomy with the minimally invasive surgical technique. In addition, the benefit of this approach has not been well confirmed based on the limited retrospective comparative studies at the present time [3, 11-12], although its potential benefit improving the immediate postoperative including the total morbidity and pulmonary complication has been demonstrated by meta-analyses[13]. Especially it is unclear whether adding laparoscopic procedures in MIE can contribute to further improvement of the perioperative outcome of the patients.[3] Previously, the investigators have found that adding of laparoscopic procedure in performing the esophageal reconstruction procedure after VATS esophagectomy can provide further benefit in reducing the postoperative major complications and fasten the postoperative recovery16. For the most cases, the patients was receiving tri-incision esophagectomy, i.e. VATS esophagectomy in the chest, laparoscopic gastric mobilization in the abdomen and left cervical esophagogastrostomy. In such circumstances, a cervical incision was required for esophagogastrostomy after esophagectomy and gastric mobilization. However, for the patients with lower-to mid third esophageal cancer, some surgeon performed Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, which performing the esophagogastrostomy in the chest after gastric mobilization without cervical incision wound. Although both of these procedures have been demonstrated to be feasible and safe, there is much debate about the advantage and disadvantage of these two approaches. For tri-incision esophagectomy, patients have the chance to have cervical lymph node dissection and the esophagus can be resected up to the neck. However, it is more time-consuming and associated with more surgical trauma by adding a cervical incisional wound and more tissue dissection around the cervical trachea as compared to that done by Ivor Lewis esophagectomy. In contrast, for the Ivor Lewis esophagectomy, the resection of esophagus was limited to the level of thoracic inlet and cervical lymph node dissection was impossible unless a neck incision was further created. However, it takes less time in performing the whole procedure by saving a neck incision.

As a 2nd generation EGFR-TKI that irreversibly binds to EGFR receptors, afatinib showed the possibility of superior effects to 1st generation TKIs such as erlotinib and gefitinib. In a phase III study LUX-lung 3 in patients with EGFR mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer, afatinib monotherapy showed longer progression-free disease survival time of 11.1 months than that (6.9 months) of pemetrexed/cisplatin combination therapy. Based on such the results, it is currently recommended as the standard first-line treatment for EGFR mutation-positive lung cancer, and clinical studies are also being actively conducted in other types of carcinomas characterized by EGFR gene mutation and overexpression. Thirty (30) solid cancer patients were included in a phase I trial of afatinib, and of them, a patient with esophageal cancer had partial response. Taken together, based upon the results from clinical trials of afatinib conducted so far, 7 out of 15 esophageal cancer patients achieved clinical responses of 3 months or longer. Hence, the overall results from previous studies of gefitinib and erlotinib as EGFR TKIs and our study of dacomitinib, as well as from preceding studies of afatinib - a 2nd generation EGFR TKI - suggest the possibility of an effective therapy in esophageal cancer characterized by well-known EGFR overexpression. In this phase II trial, afatinib shall be administered to patients with squamous cell carcinoma of esophagus to evaluate its effects and toxicity. Also, biomarkers to predict responses to afatinib shall be explored through further studies.